After the recent elections where I have been actively involved with campaigning and handing out how to vote cards, I have tried to gather some understanding of the Australian political psyche from talking to people and then from puzzling over the results of the various elections. Of course there probably is no such thing as an “Australian political psyche” since we are NOT in fact one but many (too many, actually with the population at over 24 million and the effects being felt very keenly especially in Melbourne, Sydney and Perth). It’s hard enough to understand just one person’s political psyche without trying to understand the nation's whole populace!
All the people I spoke to at the polling place yesterday largely remain an enigma to me. By the end of the day, it became apparent how fragmented most of the political views were. Or was it that I was not getting a real overview but just seeing a splinter of something that was important to each that prompted them to engage by doing as I was - distributing How To Vote material, or by being there to vote and entering into conversation?
My party was the “Sustainable Australia Party.” A man giving out Liberal HTVs sneeringly asked me “what’s sustainable? It’s just an abstract term.” I replied, “It’s no more abstract than Liberal." He then agreed with me.
I had as many curious conversations as I had the energy for with Greens, and Liberals, one with the actual Labor candidate which was tinged with what I read as, “God I wonder if I really should be speaking to this person, I’ve got no idea what this party is and no urge to find out.”
One conversation was with a young ex-policeman from the David Lyeonhelm (un spell-able) Party who was there as he was in favour of more participation of smaller parties. He mentioned, as something he objected to, the amazing number of traffic offences there are in Victoria that people can be booked for. The obvious examples are the large number of speed limit changes within small distances - a recipe for errors on the part of unsuspecting motorists. He thought they were way beyond reasonable. Population growth was not mentioned in this conversation but in fact fines for minor traffic infringements are a benefit to the State from population growth and a dis-benefit to the public who are caught in the state infrastructure web of fines.
A young woman outside the entrance to the school where the polling took place was gathering signatures on a petition against a “sky rail” which is to cater for increased traffic, fix up crossings and enable more capacity on the trains because of ……..population growth. Inside the gate was a Greens representative in green tee-shirt who told me she was opposed to the anti-sky rail woman’s stance because the overcrowding has prevented her from using the trains, although she wants to.
"This will fix it", she said. She had no idea of the underlying cause of all this. I think I could sum up her view like this: People are moving into the area because they like being close to public transport. They prefer to spend “$900,000 on a unit" in the area rather than on a house further out. This explains why all the old houses are being knocked down for units. It’s a trend - nothing to do with outside forces.
I could characterise the day by saying that people raised many issues that related to population growth, but did not acknowledge this as a cause. I raised it and got the occasional agreement but no great epiphanies.
The Municipal Association of Victoria has, unsurprisingly, issued a press release to undermine Rate Capping. Ratepayers Victoria has countered this with the following arguments: When the rate capping policy was developed and adopted, all official communique and documentation, were very clear upfront in stating that rates capping only apply to general rate and municipal charges. Other council service charges, fees, fines and differentiated rates, together with prevailing state levies (e.g. the fire Levy councils advocated for and changed to CIV rating system a few years back.) The Fair Go Rates policy is a real present and future threat to some councils, as it has taken away councils’ free reign of rates increases and require them to be more transparent any) are excluded.
The Minister also specifically said that in some cases, ratepayers will find their rates bills would increase more than 2.5% (the capped level) because of the changes in their properties’ capital improvement value and other increases in municipal charge-outs that are not subjected to the rates cap.
[The Fair Go Rates policy] is most accountable in supporting and sustaining a fairer rating system that would deliver more visible value for money services and maintain rates affordability in the longer term. Because of this threat, most councils have come together with their peak bodies, even during the development of the rates capping policy, to defend their turf. Their lobbying campaign is still continuing and growing strong despite the policy is now legislated and operating.
What Municipal Association Victoria didn’t come clean about in its 30 June media release is that rates capping can work if councils are committed to make it work. It is most inappropriate and lacks good governance behavior to continue influencing the public to think and eventually lead them to believe that the rates capping policy does not work.
The last two years of media stories clearly showed the anti-Fair Go Rates policy lobby resolve to campaign against and discredit the Fair Go Rates policy. These stories, together with local ratepayer-advocates’ reports, revealed the use of:
- media and community communication strategies, to create a series of related news and messages to socially engineer people into believing that rates capping has caused more harm than good to councils and their communities, e.g. like cutting out the school crossing services,
- diverting council funds to support collaborative projects with peak bodies, which duplicate state services e.g. the Alliance For Gambling Reform
- many internal cost shifting tactics, to ensure the parts of council-budgets constrained by rates capping are reduced or kept unchanged, in order to minimize rates reduction. For the next financial year, some councils have already and blatantly introduced new or increased existing charges, fees and differentiated rates that are not affected by rate capping.
Many people do not understand how their council rates, rates capping levels and fire levy are structured and calculated. It is easy to leverage this low community literacy and convince people that the State Government has mislead them, because their total rates payable for the next financial year is above the capped level of 2.5%. Now, in a time of political flux, just after the election, is strategically timely to leverage political pressure in any public communication broadcast.
Ratepayers are disappointed that some of their councils and their peak bodies are not willing to make rates capping policy work, eroding the opportunity of achieving longer term community and organizational improvement benefits for every stakeholder in Local Government.
Let’s cut to the chase, ratepayers would like councils and their peak bodies to stop winching up charges and resisting the rates capping policy. They should be more focused to commit to the Fair Go Rates policy and make it work to increase efficacy in council operations and bring more visible best value outcomes in municipal service. Change is incremental and to expect full delivery of long term benefits in the first year of the Fair Go Rates policy is most misleading and laden with manipulative intents.
Adapted from a press release from Rate Payers Victoria, 'The Truth is Out There' (30 June 2016).
It was great to see that SBS Australia actually published an interview by Luke Waters of the Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, last night. Assad criticized the double standards of the west, by which the west openly attacks the Syrian government politically, but continues to deal with it behind the scenes. He included Australia in this criticism. He called for a more humanitarian and less costly solution to the refugee crisis through stopping support to the terrorists. SBS's presentation of the interview was, however, very poor. The interview was preceded and followed by extremely biased material and one cannot help but think of the influence of Saudi funding on the presentation of Middle Eastern affairs by western media.
Particularly gratuitous seemed the opinion of a former Australian ambassador to Egypt, Bob Bowker, who, whilst acknowledging that Syria had been very stable (but not mentioning that it was the last of the stable governments in the Middle East apart from Iran) characterised Assad as a once 'progressive' president, who had then [unexplained] stopped being progressive; there had been protests and he had so brutally put them down that five years later, the country was still being torn apart because of that dissatisfaction. Bowker pretended that Assad had no reason to blame the disintegration of Syria on foreign-backed armies. This seemed quite incredible since the presence of multiple anti-government armies funded by the United States and various NATO entities, but especially Qatar and Saudi Arabia, is well known. Bowker is also an adjunct professor at the Centre for Arab & Islamic Studies, ANU College of Arts & Social Sciences.
Who funds such ahistorical bias? The almost blanket anti-Syrian Government media coverage which includes 'expert academic comment' in Australia and the West is probably largely funded by Saudi dollars.[1] One cannot forget that Saudi Arabia and Qatar fund study centers and other organisations and governments all over the world. In fact they are said to be responsible for 20 per cent of Hilary Clinton's campaign fund. Yet Saudi Arabia and Qatar receive little criticism from Australia or NATO although they are among the greatest human rights abusers and the most repressive governments in the world and Saudi Arabia is currently conducting a genocidal war in Yemen.
Journalist: Mr. President, thank you for speaking with SBS Australia.
President Assad: You’re most welcome in Syria.
Question 1: It’s now more than five years since the Syrian crisis began. It’s estimated somewhere around a quarter of a million people have been killed, many of them civilians. There’s an undeniable humanitarian disaster. How far into the crisis do you think you are, and is there an end in sight?
President Assad: Of course, there is an end in sight, and the solution is very clear. It’s simple yet impossible. It’s simple because the solution is very clear, how to make dialogue between the Syrians about the political process, but at the same time fighting the terrorism and the terrorists in Syria. Without fighting terrorists, you cannot have any real solution. It’s impossible because the countries that supported those terrorists, whether Western or regional like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, don’t want to stop sending all kinds of support to those terrorists. So, if we start with stopping this logistical support, and as Syrians go to dialogue, talk about the constitution, about the future of Syria, about the future of the political system, the solution is very near, not far from reach.
Question 2: Much of the reporting in the West at the moment suggests that the demise of the Islamic State is imminent. Do you believe that’s true, and how far away from seizing Raqqa, this very important city of Raqqa, do you believe you are?
President Assad: It’s not a race. Raqqa is as important as Aleppo, as Damascus, as any other city. The danger of those terrorist groups is not about what land do they occupy, because it’s not a traditional war. It’s about how much of their ideology can they instill in the mind of the people in the area that they sit or live in. Indoctrination, this is the most dangerous thing. So, reaching Raqqa is not that difficult militarily, let’s say. It’s a matter of time. We are going in that direction. But the question when you talk about war is about what the other side, let’s say the enemy, could do, and that’s directly related to the effort of Turkey, especially Erdogan, in supporting those groups, because that’s what’s happening since the beginning. If you talk about Syria as an isolated military field, you can reach that area within a few months or a few weeks, let’s say, but without taking into consideration the Turkish effort in supporting the terrorists, any answer would be a far cry from the reality, an un-factual answer.
Question 3: Mr. President, how concerned are you about recent fatal clashes which have been reported between your longtime ally Hezbollah and your own forces?
There is good Syrian-Russian-Iranian coordination on fighting terrorism
President Assad: Fighting between us and Hezbollah? They are not fighting. They support the Syrian Army. They don’t fight against the Syrian Army, they fight with the Syrian Army. The Syrian Army and Hezbollah, with the support of the Russian Air Forces, we are fighting all kinds of terrorist groups, whether ISIS or al-Nusra or other affiliated groups with Al Qaeda that’s affiliated automatically to al-Nusra and ISIS.
Question 4: So, there have been some recent reports of clashes between… are those reports incorrect.
President Assad: No, they are talking not about clashes; about, let’s say, differences and different opinions. That’s not true, and if you look at the meeting that happened recently between the Ministers of Defense in Iran, in Tehran; Syrian, Russian, and Iranian, this means there’s good coordination regarding fighting terrorism.
Question 5: To be clear, do you categorize all opposition groups as terrorists?
President Assad: Definitely not, no. When you talk about an opposition group that adopts the political means, they’re not terrorists. Whenever you hold machineguns or any other armaments and you terrorize people and you attack civilians and you attack public and private properties, you are a terrorist. But if you talk about opposition, when you talk about opposition it must be Syrian opposition. It cannot be a surrogate opposition that works as a proxy to other countries like Saudi Arabia or any other country. It must be a Syrian opposition that’s related to its Syrian grassroots, like in your country. It’s the same, I think.
Question 6: You said recently that the ceasefire offered Syrian people at least a glimmer of hope. How, five months on, do you think that hope is going?
President Assad: Yeah, it is. It’s still working, the ceasefire, but we don’t have to forget that terrorist groups violate this agreement, on a daily basis. But at the same time, we have the right, according to that agreement, to retaliate whenever the terrorists attack our government forces. So, actually you can say it’s still working in most of the areas, but in some areas it’s not.
Question 7: There are various accounts of how the Syrian crisis began. Some say it was children graffiting anti-government slogans and they were dealt with brutally by the government. I understand you don’t accept that narrative. How, in your view, did the crisis begin?
President Assad: It’s a mixture of many things. Some people demonstrated because they needed reform. We cannot deny this, we cannot say “no everybody was a terrorist” or “everyone was a mercenary.” But the majority of those demonstrators – I’m not talking about the genuine demonstrators – were paid by Qatar in order to demonstrate, then later they were paid by Qatar in order to revolt with armaments, and that’s how it started, actually. The story of children being attacked, this is an illusive story. It didn’t happen. Of course, you always have, let’s say, mistakes happening in the practice on the ground, like what happened in the United States recently, during the last year, but this is not a reason for people to hold machineguns and kill policemen and soldiers and so on.
Question 8: You do say that some of these people legitimately needed reform. Was that as a result of any heavy-handedness from your government at all?
President Assad: No, we had reform in Syria. It started mainly after 2000, in the year 2000. Some people think it was slow, some people think it was too fast, this is subjective, not objective, but we were moving in that regard. But the proof that it wasn’t about the reform, because we made all the requested reforms after the crisis started five years ago, and nothing has changed. So, it wasn’t about reform. We changed the constitution, we changed the laws that the opposition asked for, we changed many things, but nothing happened. So, it wasn’t about the reform; it was about money coming from Qatar, and most of the people that genuinely asked for reform at the beginning of the crisis, they don’t demonstrate now, they don’t go against the government, they cooperate with the government. They don’t believe, let’s say, in the political line of this government, and this is their right and that’s natural, but they don’t work against the government or against the state institutions. So, they distinguish themselves from the people who supported the terrorists.
Question 9: How do you respond to the fact that some of your ministers defected and cited brutality as reason?
President Assad: Actually, they defected because they’ve been asked to do so by, some of them, Saudi Arabia, some of them by France, it depends on the country they belong to. And now, they are belonging to that so-called opposition that belongs to those countries, not to the Syrians. They have no values in Syria, so we wouldn’t worry about that. It didn’t change anything. I mean it didn’t affect the fact or the reality in Syria.
Question 10: One of your main backers, Russia, has called for a return to the peace talks. Do you think that’s a good idea?
President Assad: You mean in Geneva?
Journalist: Yes.
Geneva negotiations need to have the basic principles in order to be fruitful
President Assad: Yeah, of course, we support every talk with every Syrian party, but in reality those talks haven’t been started yet, and there’s no Syrian-Syrian talks till this moment, because we only made negotiations with the facilitator, which is Mr. de Mistura. Actually, it hasn’t started. So, we support the principle, but in practice you need to have a certain methodology that didn’t exist so far. So, we need to start, but we need to have the basic principles for those negotiations to be fruitful.
Question 11: One thing that intrigues a lot of people about the Syrian crisis is why your close allies Iran and Russia stay so loyal?
By defending Syria, allies are defending their stability and interests
President Assad: Because it wasn’t about the President, it’s not about the person. This is the misinterpretation, or let’s say the misconception in the West, and maybe part of the propaganda, that Russia and Iran supported Assad, or supported the President. It’s not like this. It’s about the whole situation. The chaos in Syria is going to provoke a domino effect in our region, that’s going to affect the neighboring countries, it’s going to affect Iran, it’s going to affect Russia, it’s going to affect Europe, actually. So, when they defend Syria, they defend the stability and they defend their stability, they defend their interest. And at the same time, it’s about the principle. They defend the Syrian people and their right to protect themselves. Because if they defend the President and the Syrian people are not with him and don’t support him, I cannot withstand five years just because Russia and Iran support me. So, it’s not about the President, it’s about the whole situation, the bigger picture, let’s say.
Question 12: Do you have any dialogue either direct or indirectly with the United States?
Western countries are dealing with Syria through back channels
President Assad: At all, nothing at all. Indirect, yes, indirect, through different channels. But if you ask them they will deny it, and we’re going to deny it. But in reality, it exists; the back channels.
Question 13: What are some of those channels?
President Assad: I mean, let’s say, businessmen going and traveling around the world and meeting with the officials in the United States and in Europe, they meet in Europe, and they try to convey certain messages, but there’s nothing serious, because we don’t think the administration, the American administration, is serious about solving the problem in Syria.
Question 14: Well, quite recently, there were reports more than 50 diplomats have called for what they described as “real and effective military strikes” against you, against Syria. Does this in any way concern you, and do you think it signals a more aggressive policy from the United States towards Syria moving forward?
American administrations are famous of creating problems, but they never solve any
President Assad: No, warmongers in every American administration always exist. It’s not something new. But we wouldn’t give a fig, let’s say, about this communique, but it’s not about this communique; it’s about the policy, it’s about the actions. The difference between this administration and the previous one, Bush’s one, is that Bush sent his troops. This one is sending mercenaries, and turned a blind eye to what Saudi Arabia and Turkey and Qatar did, since the beginning of the crisis. So, it’s the same policy. It’s a militaristic policy, but in different ways. So, this communique is not different from the reality on the ground. This is asking for war, and the reality is a war.
Question 15: You referred to the previous government, the Bush government. There are some who say one of the reasons you’ve survived as long as a government has been America’s reluctance to get on the ground in another war in the Middle East. Do you not accept that, based on what you’re saying?
President Assad: Yeah, the American administrations since the 50s are very famous of creating problems but they never solve any problems, and that’s what happened in Iraq. Bush invaded Iraq, in a few weeks he could occupy Iraq, but then what’s next? It’s not about occupying. This is a great power. We’re not a great power. So, it’s not about America occupying Syria. What’s next? What do they want to achieve? They haven’t achieved anything. They failed in Libya, in Iraq, in Yemen, in Syria, everywhere. They only created chaos. So, if the United States wants to create more chaos it can, it can create chaos, but can they solve the problem? No.
Question 16: Do you have a preference who wins the upcoming US election?
President Assad: Actually no, we never bet on any American president, because usually what they say in the campaign is different from their practice after they become president, and Obama is an example, so we don’t have to wait. We have to wait and see what policy they’re going to adopt, whoever wins the elections.
Question 17: So, you can see a circumstance where Syria would work collaboratively with the United States and the West?
We are not against cooperation with the US based on mutual interest
President Assad: We don’t have a problem with the United States, they’re not our enemy, they don’t occupy our land. We have differences, and those differences go back to the 70s and maybe before that, but in many different times, let’s say, and events and circumstances, we had cooperation with the United States. So, we’re not against this cooperation. But, this cooperation means talking about and discussing and working for the mutual interest, not for their interest at the expense of our interest. So, we don’t have a problem.
Question 18: Mr. President, you’ve spent a lot of time yourself, as you’ve just said, in the United Kingdom. Can you see there being any repercussions for Britain’s decision to exit the European Union for Syria and for the Syrian crisis?
British people are revolting against their “second-tier” and “disconnected” politicians
President Assad: I don’t think I can elaborate about that, as it’s a British issue, and I’m not British neither European. But at the same time I can say that this surprising result, maybe, has many different components, whether internal as economic and external as the worry from the terrorism, security issues, refugees, and so on. But this is an indication for us, as those officials who used to give me the advice about how to deal with the crisis in Syria, and say “Assad must go” and “he’s disconnected” proven to be disconnected from reality, otherwise they wouldn’t have asked for this referendum, but I think this is a revolt of the people there against, I would call them sometimes second-tier politicians. They needed special, let’s say, statecraft officials, to deal their country. If another administration came and understands that the issue of refugees and security is related to the problem in our region, this is where you’re going to have a different policy that will affect us positively. But I don’t have now a lot of hope about this. Let’s say we have a slim hope, because we don’t know who’s going to come after Cameron in the UK.
Question 19: Can I ask; Australia is part of the international coalition to defeat the Islamic State. Obviously, that’s one of your goals, so in that instance there’s a shared goal. Do you welcome international intervention when there’s a shared goal like that.
President Assad: Actually, we welcome any effort to fight terrorism in Syria, any effort, but this effort first of all should be genuine, not window-dressing like what’s happening now in northern Syria where 60 countries couldn’t prevent ISIS from expanding. Actually, when the Russian air support started, only at that time when ISIS stopped expanding. So, it needs to be genuine. Second, it needs to be through the Syrian legitimate government, not just because they want to fight terrorism and they can go anywhere in the world. We are a legitimate government and we are a sovereign country. So, only on these two circumstances we welcome any foreign support to fight terrorism.
Question 20: A number of Australians have died fighting for either the Kurdish militia or the Islamic State. Do you have a message for these young people who feel so enraged by what’s taking place in Syria that they travel over here to fight?
President Assad: Again, the same, let’s say, answer. If there are foreigners coming without the permission of the government, they are illegal, whether they want to fight terrorists or want to fight any other one. It is the same. It’s illegal, we can call it.
Question 21: Mr. President, Australian politicians have used very strong language about your role in the crisis, as have other leaders, internationally. Australia’s Prime Minister has referred to you as a “murderous tyrant,” saying that you’re responsible for killing thousands of innocent civilians. Australia’s opposition leader has called you a “butcher.” Yet Australia’s official position is still to work with you toward a peace agreement. How do you reconcile those two very different positions?
Western nations attack Syrian government and yet deal with it under the table
President Assad: Actually, this is the double standard of the West in general. They attack us politically and they send us their officials to deal with us under the table, especially the security, including your government. They all do the same. They don’t want to upset the United States. Actually, most of the Western officials only repeat what the United States wants them to say. This is the reality. So, I think these statements, I just can say they are disconnected from our reality, because I’m fighting terrorists, our army is fighting terrorists, our government is against terrorists, the whole institutions are against terrorists. If you call fighting terrorism butchery, that’s another issue.
Question 22: Australia has agreed to take an additional twelve thousand Syrian refugees; some have already arrived. Do you have a message for these Syrians, many of whom still say they love Syria and they want to return. Do you have a message for those people, as I said, who are in Australia, and other countries around the world?
A more humanitarian and less costly European solution to refugee crisis is stopping support to terrorists
President Assad: Actually, you mentioned a very important point. Most of the refugees that left Syria, they want to come back to Syria. So, any country that helped them enter their new country, let’s say, their new homeland, is welcome as a humanitarian action, but again there is something more humanitarian and less costly: is to help them staying in their country, help them going back by helping the stability in Syria, not to give any umbrella or support to the terrorists. That’s what they want. They want the Western governments to take decisive decisions against what Saudi Arabia and other Western countries, like France and UK, are doing in order to support the terrorists in Syria just to topple the government. Otherwise, those Syrians wouldn’t have left Syria. Most of them, they didn’t leave because they are against the government or with the government; they left because it’s very difficult to live in Syria these days.
Question 23: Do you hope that these people will return and would you facilitate for them to return? President Assad: Definitely, I mean losing people as refugees is like losing human resources. How can you build a country without human resources? Most of those people are educated, well trained, they have their own businesses in Syria in different domains. You lose all this, of course, we need.
Question 24: The Commission for International Justice and Accountability says there are thousands of government documents which say has proved your government sanctioned mass torture and killings. In the face of that evidence, how do you say that no crimes have taken place, and I point also to other independent organizations, which are critical of deliberate targeting hospitals. Do you concede that some mistakes have been made as you’ve targeted some rebel-held areas?
President Assad: You are talking about two different things. One of them, the first one is the reports. The most important report that’s been financed by Qatar, just to defame the Syrian government, and they have no proof, who took the pictures, who are the victims in those pictures, and so on. Like you can forge anything if you want now on the computer. So, it is not credible at all. Second, talking about attacking hospitals or attacking civilians, the question, the very simple question is: why do we attack hospitals and civilians? I mean the whole issue, the whole problem in Syria started when those terrorists wanted to win the hearts of the Syrians. So, attacking hospitals or attacking civilians is playing into the hands of the terrorists. So, if we put the values aside now for a while, let’s talk about the interests. No government in this situation has any interest in killing civilians or attacking hospitals. Anyway, if you attack hospitals, you can use any building to be a hospital. No, these are an anecdotal claims, mendacious statements I can say; they are not credible at all. We’re still sending vaccines to those areas under the control of the terrorists. So, how can I send vaccines and attack the hospitals? This is a contradiction.
Question 25: Mr. President, as a father and as a man, has there been one anecdote, one story, one image from the crisis, which has affected you personally more than others?
President Assad: Definitely, we are humans, and I am Syrian like the other Syrians. I will be more sympathetic with any Syrian tragedy affecting any person or family, and in this region, we are very emotional people, generally. But as an official, I am not only a person, I am an official. As an official, the first question you ask when you have that feeling is what are you going to do, what are you going to do to protect other Syrians from the same suffering? That’s the most important thing. So, I mean, this feeling, this sad feeling, this painful feeling, is an incentive for me to do more. It’s not only a feeling.
Question 26: What’s your vision for Syria? How do you see things in two to three years?
President Assad: After the crisis or…? Because, the first thing we would like to see is to have Syria stable as it used to be before, because it was one of the most stable countries and secure countries around the world, not only in our region. So, this the first thing. If you have this, you can have other ambitions. Without it you cannot. I mean, if you have this, the other question: how to deal with the new generation that lived the life of killing, that saw the extremism or learned the extremism or indoctrinated by Al Qaeda-affiliated groups, and so on. This is another challenge. The third one is bringing back those human resources that left as refugees in order to rebuild Syria. Rebuilding the country as buildings or infrastructure is very easy; we are capable of doing this as Syrians. The challenge is about the new generation.
Question 27: How do you think history will reflect on your presidency?
President Assad: What I wish is to say that this is the one who saved his country from the terrorists and from the external intervention. That is what I wish about it. Anything else would be left to the judgment of the Syrian people, but this is my only wish.
Journalist: Mr. President, Thank you very much for speaking with SBS Australia.
President Assad: Thank you very much.
NOTES
Funding of universities with Saudi dollars has been abundantly flagged as unwise because of Saudi promotion of the doctrine of Wahhabism which is the basis of many Islamic terrorist groups. However, what has not been discussed in Australia is the way such funds can then influence commentary on foreign affairs and the wars that the Saudis back. The almost blanket anti-Syrian Government media coverage which includes 'expert academic comment' in the West is probably largely funded by Saudi dollars. In 2006 it was reported that "Prince Al-Waleed has recently bought 5.46% of the voting shares of News Corporation, Rupert Murdoch’s diversified international media and entertainment empire that includes Fox News Channel (FNC). Fox had been reporting on the Saudi role in the promotion of Islamist terror, and it is thought that the prince may hope to dampen any potential criticism by his investment." (Implications of Saudi Funding to Western Academic Institutions)
Mervyn Bendle, "Secret Saudi funding of Australian institutions," News Weekly, February 21, 2009
"Many Australian universities, now driven entirely by financial priorities, have uncritically welcomed Saudi sources of funding, even though this creates a major national security problem, writes Mervyn F. Bendle. Massive funding is presently being provided by Saudi Arabia to promote Wahhabism, the fundamentalist, exclusivist, punitive, and sectarian form of Islam that is both the Saudi state religion, and the chief theological component of Sunni versions of Islamism, the totalitarian ideology guiding jihadism and most of the active terrorist groups in the world. Globally, this money is flowing to terrorist groups, political parties and religious and community groups, as well as to universities and schools. In Australia, there is concern that such funding could damage and even corrupt the Australian university system, especially given the existing ideological bias, political naivety, opportunism, managerialism, and the pseudo-entrepreneurial attitudes of many university academics and administrators. The question of how foreign powers and agents are able to influence, direct or even control tertiary education in Australia and other Western countries is vitally important. This is because the rise of Islamism, jihadism and the present terrorism crisis increasingly involve fourth-generation warfare (4GW)." [...] "An excellent case study of how Saudi funding can impact on Australian universities is the recent fiasco at Queensland's Griffith University. In April 2008, it was revealed that Griffith University "practically begged the Saudi Arabian embassy to bankroll its Islamic campus for $1.3 million", assuring the Saudis that arrangements could be kept secret if required. (The Australian, April 22, 2008)."
"Given the vast sums of petrodollars and the availability of useful idiots and agents of influence in strategic positions, it is unlikely that Australian universities will resist the allure of Saudi funding, nor will they resist pressure to guide their teaching and research in an Islamist direction, especially in connection with the war on terror, the history of Islam, the Middle East conflict, Islam and the West, and the role of women. Consequently, it will only be continuing public and academic vigilance and political pressure that will protect Australia's tertiary education system, moderate Muslim communities and liberal democratic traditions." Source: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-10-13/32626
Rising sea temperatures in the Mediterranean are encouraging alien lionfish species to invade and colonise new territories with potentially serious ecological and socioeconomic impacts.
Evidence collated from divers and fishermen reveals that in the space of a year, the venomous predators have colonised Cyprus – and these may be at the vanguard of a pan-Atlantic Ocean invasion following the widening and deepening of the Suez Canal.
The report, published in Marine Biodiversity Records, was written by Mr Demetris Kletou, of the Marine & Environmental Research Lab, in Limassol, Cyprus; and Professor Jason Hall-Spencer, of the School of Marine Science and Engineering at Plymouth University.
“Until now, few sightings of the alien lionfish Pterois miles have been reported in the Mediterranean and it was questionable whether the species could invade this region like it has in the western Atlantic,” says Mr Kletou. “But we’ve found that lionfish have recently increased in abundance, and within a year have colonised almost the entire south eastern coast of Cyprus, assisted by sea surface warming.”
Lionfish are generalist carnivores and can feed on a variety of fish and crustaceans, with large individuals preying almost exclusively on fish. They spawn every four days, year-round, producing around two million buoyant gelatinous eggs per year, which can ride the ocean currents and cover large distances for about a month before they settle.
Their success at invading new territories stems from a combination of factors such as early maturation and reproduction, and venomous spines that deter predators, and they can quickly colonise reefs and reduce biodiversity in the area.
The research team collated information on reported encounters in coastal waters from divers, spearfishers and fishermen, and conducted interviews, gathering photographic and video evidence, and recording the date of the sighting, and the location. In addition, governmental officers of the Department of Fisheries and Marine Research (DFMR) of the Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Development and Environment, in Cyprus, shared information and specimens captured in nets by local coastal fishermen.
The results show that the lionfish P. miles has colonised almost the entire south eastern coast of Cyprus, from Limassol to Protaras in just one year.
At least 23 new and confirmed sightings of 19 individuals were recorded, such as three pairs sighted from the south-eastern side of Cyprus, one off Larnaca, one at Zinovia wreck and one at Ptotaras. One of the pairs has since become a group of five, all living together at Cyclops Caves.
Professor Hall-Spencer said:
“Groups of lionfish exhibiting mating behaviour have been noted for the first time in the Mediterranean. By publishing this information, we can help stakeholders plan mitigating action, such as offering incentives for divers and fishermen to run lionfish removal programmes, which have worked well at shallow depths in the Caribbean, and restoring populations of potential predators, such as the dusky grouper. Given that the Suez Canal has recently been widened and deepened, measures will need to be put in place to help prevent further invasion.”
The research paper, A lionfish (Pterois miles) invasion has begun in the Mediterranean Sea, will be published on 28 June in Marine Biodiversity Records.
People who have complained to me of poor coverage by the Australian media of the underlying reasons for Britain's exit from the EU will enjoy these shows. They report on various aspects, including the possibility of preventing the privatisation of British hospitals and mining, the ability to try to end Britain's live transport of domestic animals for thousands of kms, the ability to stop fracking, the desirability of a decrease in house prices, the reasons why people outside the big cities voted against the EU, and mass immigration in an economy where unemployment is already high and numbers are an issue.
English language programs
"It's panic stations amongst the ruling elites." On Sputnik's Referendum Special, George Galloway, interviews journalist Selina Scott, who sums up the EU as undemocratic, noting that the British have no ability to affect decisions on fracking, live transport or anything else of note. He also interviews a very traditional Alex Graham, former president of the RMT union, who believes that trade unions have lost confidence in their ability to defend members’ rights and an exit from the EU could bring back control. Either way, both our guests agree the Brexit vote was in part a rejection by the working class of the prevailing neoliberal orthodoxy and they came to the studio to explain why.
In "Brexit Special: Are we living in a Disunited Kingdom?", Afshin Rattansi of Going Underground, does not shy from putting the positives of Britain's referendum outcome, including more affordable housing. He interviews Alex Salmond, former First Minister of the Scottish National Party about the implications of Brexit for another Scottish referendum, asks Conservative MP, David Davies if Brexit could be the end of the UK and hears from a former Labour home secretary, Yvette Cooper, who thinks a break-up of Britain could spell the end of her party, and from former coalition business secretary Sir Vince Cable, on the day his former boss resigned.
In The Big Picture, journalist Thom Hartman, usually very defensive on the goods of immigration, gets out of that groove on this occasion and gives good time to the valid negatives, also citing some erudite sources on the matter.
The Keiser Report does its own wild but substantial analysis of Brexit, coming down hard on the high house prices and the arcane self-justifications of the elites and mainstream press. "Max and Stacy are joined from New York City by Mitch Feierstein of PlanetPonzi.com to dissect the economic, monetary and financial consequences of the ‘shocking’ Brexit vote - Britain votes to leave the European Union. The Keiser Report team look closer at the market sell off and ask if it’s part of a wider market weakness set in motion months ago, then examine the role of the media, much as in the rise of Donald Trump, in simply failing to understand the ‘disposable’ voters left behind by globalization. Mitch shows a chart proving that the biggest pound sterling sell-off was actually in 2008 and the currency has never really recovered since then. Finally, they look at the opportunities presented by panic selling."
In Sophie and Co Sophie Shevardnadze interviews Ken Livingstone, former mayor of London and Labor Party veteran, who pushes a globalist agenda on immigration and economics, but she keeps at him, revealing the inconsistencies.
Interviews in French:
A young pro-Brexit Franco-German speaks up. On France2's Friday 24 June 8pm program, Marie Drucker interviews Charlotte Kude, 25 years old of GermanFrench nationality and a parliamentary employee with the EU. Supposedly the young were among the pro-EU majority, but Charlotte became a spokesperson for the "Vote Leave" side. She is very happy about the Brexit win. "The British are not rejecting Europeans, they are rejecting the obsolete system (...). They were hoping to send a message to the political project and also in the hope that the EU would wake up to the welfare of all those that still remain members.
A chasm between bureaucrats and citizens: This young woman became a eurosckeptic through her experience in the European Parlement. "I was struck by the chasm beween the lifestyle of the bureaucrats in Brussels and that of European citizens. (...) More than 10,000 [among the Brussels bureaucrats] are paid more than the British Primeminister, for example. They don't pay taxes; they can drink, eat, travel with all expenses paid. And, in my opinion, that's what's contributing to the bubble they are living in which must eventually explode." [1]
Notes
[1] Original french summary of the interview: Charlotte Kude, 25 ans, est une assistante parlementaire franco-allemande. Surtout, elle est pour la sortie du Royaume-Uni de l'UE et est ainsi devenue porte-parole du mouvement "Vote Leave". Elle se réjouit donc du succès du Brexit. "Ce ne sont pas les Européens que les Britanniques rejettent, c'est bien le système politique obsolète qu'ils rejettent.(...) C'est le projet politique auxquels ils ont souhaité envoyé un message, et dans l'espoir aussi que l'Union européenne se réveille pour le bien-être de tous ceux qui y sont encore".
Un fossé entre bureaucrates et citoyens
La jeune femme est devenue eurosceptique par son expérience au Parlement européen. "J'ai été vraiment interpellée par le fossé entre le train de vie des bureaucrates à Bruxelles et celui des citoyens européens. (...) Il y en a plus de 10 000 qui sont payés plus que le Premier ministre britannique par exemple, ils ne payent pas d'impôts, ils peuvent boire, manger, voyager tous frais payés. Et ça, à mon sens, ça entretient cette bulle qui va finir par imploser"."
On 23 June, just prior to the vote on whether Britain should leave the European Union (referred to as 'Brexit'), Paul Craig Roberts (pictured right) put the case for Brexit in a 30 minute interview with Richie Allen (pictured left).
The interview is embedded below as a YouTube video. This 30 minute interview, provides clear, compelling arguments as to why it is urgently necessary for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union, not only to preserve its national sovereignty, but to prevent the war against Russia planned by the rulers of the United States. In the interview Paul Craig Roberts also confronts, and thoroughly demolishes, claims by those arguing for Britain to remain in the European Union, that those advocating Brexit are racist and xenophobic.
He puts clearly and succinctly the arguments that everybody has the right to control the numbers of people entering their community. It is not unreasonable for a community to object to large numbers of people from a different culture suddenly moving into their midst.
Paul Craig Roberts argues that while the British and other Europeans are right to object to as sudden high influx of refugees and immigrants, they should remember that these people are fleeing their own countries because of wars that the rulers of Europe and Britain have inflicted upon their countries.
This article is about the real reason why the medicare rebates don't cover the cost of doctors' services and therefore why the practice of general medicine is increasingly unsatisfactory for doctors and patients.
I was inspired to attempt this article by a letter just published in the Age because it articulated my own concerns. The only thing it lacks is that it fails to give the principle reason for the very high costs of running a medical practice.
It is particularly galling that Labor has adopted the catchcry "Save Medicare". Apparently Medicare is sacred and untouchable. This attitude prevents any possibility of the reform that it desperately needs. It is also galling that Labor is spruiking that the removal of the freeze on rebates will allow GPs to keep bulk billing and this will "save Medicare". The current rebate for a standard GP consultation lasting up to 20minutes is $37.05. Without the freeze, the rebate would be around $39 and by mid-2018 around $40. If GPs had to depend on such paltry amounts for their incomes, Medicare would have died a long time ago.
The truth is that GPs who do not see a patient every six minutes can continue to bulk bill by supplementing their incomes with various care plans, health assessments, home medicine reviews, case conferences, practice incentive payments etc. These processes allow GPs to generate a reasonable income, but there has never been proof that they improve health outcomes. The lowly consultation rebate, frozen or not, encourages GPs to manufacture incomes from these dubious methods. Some, dare I say it, "dodgy" doctors do more than their fair share of "dodgy"' care plans.
The most important 15 minutes in the health system is the consultation with GPs. It must be valued appropriately so that GPs can take a patient's history, examine them and think about a treatment plan that avoids the current blowout of follow-on costs in investigations and referrals. Medicare must be reformed. Neither Labor nor the Coalition have the honesty and courage to do this. It is more complicated than Labor's puerile and disingenuous sloganeering suggests.
Dr Philip Barraclough, Highett
Why do medical practices cost too much to run?
I'll give you a hint. It's not the insurance costs.
A couple of years ago I went for an interview at a GP clinic in an inner suburb of Melbourne, in the region of Armadale or Toorak. It was explained to me that the practice tried to limit the amount of time spent with patients and to make up costs by running various electronic, self-evaluating programs, to diagnose various mental health issues, such as depression. The hard-faced GP interviewing me was keen to tease out any tendency I might have to spend time on supportive or other psychotherapy and it didn't take him long to detect these.
"That might be alright for a GP practising in the outer suburbs," he sniffed, "But there is no way we are going to cover costs here and make a profit by spending time with patients. Our mental health nurses here have got it down to a fine art. They use self-evaluation forms as a way of interacting therapeutically with the patients and then they use the same forms for their reports. Personally I think you may be a little too one-to-oneish for this practice."
I needed the job, so tried to sound very flexible on these issues, but he wasn't fooled. He asked me whether I had any political philosophy and, before I could answer, he told me that I really should get familiar with Ayn Rand. He was the first person I have ever met, outside a novel, with the exception of some 'counter-culture' heroine addicts in the 1980s, who had ever expressed any open approval of this writer. I had heard that Rand's 'objectivist' philosophy had enjoyed a resurgence with US and other neocons, but I admit that I was shocked to find her lurking in a Melbourne GP clinic. I guess that made me naive, however, if I knew my GP was an avid fan of Ayn Rand, I would run a mile!
But, anyway, the thing that most interested me about this job interview was the acknowledgement that the cost of rental and real-estate in Australia, particularly within the inner suburbs, was so prohibitive that a doctor wishing to succeed simply could not afford to spend time with patients and, furthermore, artfully deployed gimmicks and electronic questionnaires to take the place of proper physical and mental examinations and treatment.
Because the major cost of doing business in Australia is the cost of land and rents. A business-owner must pay for two premises: the one he or she sleeps in and the one they do business at. Furthermore, they must pay their staff high enough wages for their staff to be able to afford Melbourne's high rentals and house prices. Australia has some of the highest land prices in the world and that goes a long way to explain why small and medium business enterprises so frequently fail. It also explains why Australian manufacturing is in decline and unable to compete with overseas products which do not have nearly as high costs. And high land prices drive up the cost of everything else, including power and water. Even insurance goes up because it must meet this inflation.
And it explains why medicare rebates are no longer adequate to cover patient visits and why GPs practically give you the bum's rush out of their offices almost as soon as you enter, why they won't let you tell them more than one thing that is wrong with you, and why they won't take time to discuss their diagnosis, and why their diagnosis is so often wrong!
Service quality probably increases with distance from the city as the land and rent costs diminish. Maybe some city GPs tak refuge in Ayn Rand in order to rationalise their increasing exploitation and degrading of social capital in an effort to make ends meet.
Whose fault is it?
And whose fault is this? It is the fault of the growth lobby, which has succeeded in raising immigration rates so high in Australia that there is permanently rising inflation of land-prices. Both major political parties and the Greens are responsible parts of this lobby. The first two have massive investments in land-speculation and financing. The Greens utterly refuse to say anything against the engineering of massive population growth in Australia.
A new front has opened in the student-migration scam, whereby the Turnbull Government has opened the door to international primary school students and their guardians to access Australian schools and purchase Australian property ahead of achieving permanent residency. From SBS News:
From July 1, students aged six and above would be able to apply for student visas regardless of their country of citizenship – and their guardians can also apply for Guardian visas (subclass 580)…
These visa-rule changes, which were announced during Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s visit to China in April, also mean non-residents can buy several new properties or one existing property…
Dave Platter, from the leading Chinese international-property portal Juwai.com said there has been a nearly 20 per cent jump in inquiries for properties in Australia since Mr Turnbull’s announcement…
Estate agents Vera and Geoffrey Wong have hosted an open home in Sydney’s Eastwood.
Most of their clients are either Chinese or South Korean investors, and Mr Wong says when they were choosing a property, there is no doubt their children’s education is considered most important.
He said buyers are planning purchases that cater for their children’s entire education.
“Schooling … that is – I can’t emphasise it enough – is one of the main factors,” he said.
“Our clients, I would say over 70 per cent, (are looking,) at schooling and the university afterwards.”
Unbelievable. Primary schools in “good” catchment areas are already bursting at the seams. Meanwhile, Australia’s biggest cities, which is where most migrants arrive, are already struggling to digest a decade of rampant population growth (immigration), which has clogged their roads, trains, and reduced residents’ overall amenity.
And yet the government wants to add more immigrant fuel to the fire, just so that it keeps a floor under Australia’s already ridiculously expensive house values.
Where is the additional federal investment in schools and infrastructure to keep up with the migrant influx? And where is the consideration of impacts on Australia’s existing residents – especially young families struggling to buy a home and put their children through schooling?
Is this what Australia has been reduced to: flogging land, houses and visas to wealthy Chinese? Is this what Turnbull really means by his “innovation agenda”? Surely we can do better.
Do you remember coming to previous elections and going to vote above the line, then suddenly realising that you hadn't thought to find out about every senate candidate? So, there you were, obliged to fill out every box, trying to guess from the names the least evil of the fifty or seventy candidates you had never heard of. This election there has been a profound and potentially very empowering change. We will have the opportunity to vote for six only or more senate candidates. So we will be able to vote for the people and parties we really want this time and not vote at all for the ones we don't want or do not know. The article below is republished from the Australian Electoral Commission website. It gives the names of the candidates and links to their websites where known. At the bottom there is a collection of little-known independent candidates. In most cases you can use search engines to find these candidates. We will put up the candidates for other states if and when we have time, but you can get their names and affiliations and download an excel file with their websites and contact details here: http://aec.gov.au/election/candidates.htm.
2016 Victorian Senate Ballot Paper (116 Candidates)
Candidate Name Party
[Candobetter.net Editor: The letters on the left represent the ballot positions, but if you want to be sure, go to the AEC at http://aec.gov.au/election/candidates.htm]
CARR Kim Australian Labor Party
CONROY Stephen Michael Australian Labor Party
COLLINS Jacinta Australian Labor Party
MARSHALL Gavin Australian Labor Party
YANG Chien-Hui Australian Labor Party
PERSSE Louise Australian Labor Party
KENT Steve Australian Labor Party
TARCZON Les Australian Labor Party
FIFIELD Mitch Liberal
McKENZIE Bridget The Nationals
RYAN Scott Liberal
PATERSON James Liberal
HUME Jane Liberal
OKOTEL Karina Liberal
TRELOAR Rebecca The Nationals
DI NATALE Richard The Greens
RICE Janet The Greens
COLEMAN Misha The Greens
KLEIN Elise The Greens
CRABB Anna The Greens
SEARLE James The Greens
MINIFIE Tasma The Greens
ALDEN Jennifer The Greens
CAMERON Judy The Greens
SEKHON Gurm The Greens
MAGUIRE-ROSIER Josephine The Greens
READ Rose The Greens
DOIG Meredith Australian Sex Party
MULCAHY Amy Australian Sex Party
UNG
UNGROUPED
JUHASZ Stephen Independent
ARASU Karthik Independent
HALL Dennis Independent
SPASOJEVIC Dana Independent
KARAGIANNIDIS John Independent
LUTZ Geoff Independent
MULL Allan Independent
RYAN Chris Independent
VADARLIS Eric Independent
DICKENSON Mark Francis Independent
SHMUEL Immanuel Independent
FLOYD Glenn Independent
URIE Meredith Independent
NYE Trevor William Independent
HAWKS Peter John Independent
BESLIS Christopher Independent
For the past ten years Australians have been subjected to an exceptionally high level of population growth and now they are losing patience. (Article first published on June 13, 2016 at the Australian Population Research Institute. Republished here for the second time owing to recent data loss from site.)
The graph shows the steep increase in numbers since 2006 (data from here). If this continues the population will grow from 24 million today to around 41 million in 2061 (see the 2013 ABS projection series 29 and 41).
In November 2015 a survey commissioned by Sustainable Population Australia (SPA) found that 51% of voters thought Australia did not need more people. Then in May this year a survey done for SBS TV found that 59% of people thought that the level of immigration over the last 10 years had been too high.
The SPA survey asked respondents to give reasons for their opinion. Many of those who thought we did not need more people said our cites were overcrowded (with too much traffic)—consequences of rapid growth all too apparent to urbanites. Others spoke of job competition. And many worried about the effects of growth on Australia’s fragile environment. Concern about too much cultural diversity and migrant enclaves was also high on the list.
The SBS survey focused on immigration and found that dissatisfaction with immigration was even higher than with growth in general. It asked about multiculturalism and 46% of respondents said that this had failed. It had brought social division and religious extremism to Australia (43% of those who were immigrants themselves agreed).
It was reasonable for SBS to focus on immigration because this accounts for the major part of the current population boom — around 58%.
Immigration is a product of government policy. It’s the outcome of decisions made by political elites, prompted by lobbyists for property developers, employers, and other businesses that profit from population growth. The two surveys show that the electorate is fed up with the unwanted growth that this power elite has wished upon them.
The record numbers of migrants in the 2000s were partly justified by the push to keep affordable skills coming during the investment phase of the resources boom. But since 2012 that justification has evaporated and economic growth has slowed. Despite this, Governments, both Labor and Coalition, have kept immigration high. Now the motivation is to keep the housing and development interests happy. They continue to profit from a stream of new customers, a stream which also keeps the construction industry going and creates the appearance of a busy economy. But this strategy has not increased per capita income. Quite the reverse.
It’s not just that forced population growth leads to clogged infrastructure, cultural disruption and environmental deterioration, it is also comes with financial stress.
While headline GDP growth across Australia has held-up reasonably well over the past decade, thanks to high immigration, per capita real GDP is trending down so sharply that it has fallen to levels not seen since the early-1980s recession. … #_edn5" name="_ednref5" id="_ednref5">
While real GDP has been rising since December 2011, net disposable income (NDI) per capita has been falling. See graph below. (NDI is explained here.)
Urban voters are also angry about the level of densification forced on them by undemocratic planning authorities determined to accommodate developers. Groups such as Planning Backlash,#_edn9" name="_ednref9" id="_ednref9"> BRAG (Boroondara Residents Action Group),#_edn10" name="_ednref10" id="_ednref10"> Save our Suburbs, RAGE (Residents against Greedy Enterprise) and the Carlton Residents Association all express deep frustration about over-development, loss of heritage and declining quality of life.
So far the growth lobby has been able to keep on profiting from ballooning numbers, partly because few voters fully understand what is being done to them. They know that conditions are getting worse but they don’t fully understand the key role played by population growth.
The SPA survey tested respondents’ knowledge of demographic change. The minority (16%) who had a good understanding were the most likely to say that Australia does not need more people. But 82% knew very little. Though they were unhappy about time-devouring traffic jams and ugly new high-rise apartments, they didn’t always know why these miseries were being wished upon them, or why they felt so powerless.
But their unhappiness has political effects, effects which can explain why governments have been toppling so fast. Kelvin Thomson calls this the witches hat theory of why governments fail. Mark O’Connor summarises it thus:
[S]taying in power, and keeping the electorate happy is a little like an advanced driving course, one in which a government is required to thread a kind of slalom course between a series of witches’ hats — meaning the orange inverted cones that mark out the course. These hats, which the government, like the driver, needs to avoid knocking over, include such things as keeping electricity and water costs down, reducing hospital queues, keeping housing affordable, preserving the environment, providing full employment, restricting inflation, etc.
And the faster a country’s population is rising, the harder it is to do this… It’s like trying to negotiate the course at double speed.
As Thomson himself puts it: [W]hen politicians … look in the mirror and ask ‘Why don’t they like me?’, the answer might well be that they are driving the car too fast and knocking over those witches’ hats. They should slow the car down and focus on solving people’s real-life problems.
It is not surprising that Dick Smith, outspoken critic of mindless population growth, is now the most trusted public figure in Australia. Or that mainstream politicians are among the least trusted.
The OpenAustralia Foundation, the charity that runs a more accessible Hansard, has made an announcement about the progress of its Planning Alerts service. This is a free and community commons service. It gives citizens some ability to keep up with what the developers and mum and dad subdividers are up to. This, in turn, will give ordinary citizens and residents more insight into the impact of population growth, more information to make political decisions, and more control over its rapid creep.
PlanningAlerts makes it easy to impact what happens to your local buildings, parks, streets, and infrastructure. Over the last 7 years almost 40,000 people have signed up for alerts and thousands of you have made official comments on development applications for everyone to see.
But there are more ways to impact what gets built and knocked down. There are people at the council whose job is to understand their community and advocate for people like you who care about it. These people are your local councillors and they work for you.
If you want to help shape how your community changes then these are great people to talk to. They can make sure you’re heard at council meetings, find and request information for you, help you organise locals around the issues that matter, and much more. These are powerful ways to have a direct impact—but working with your councillors hasn’t been part of PlanningAlerts … until now.
Start a conversation
You can now easily ask your local councillors about a development application you care about in PlanningAlerts. This is a new feature that we’ve worked hard to make as simple as possible for you.
People living in over 70 council areas around Australia will now see an option to write to their local councillors in PlanningAlerts. Since we switched this feature on, dozens of people have used it and councillors from across Australia have responded.
Lots of people do currently write to local councillors about planning, but these conversations all happen in private.
In PlanningAlerts the full exchange is public. You can share and discuss what is (or isn’t) said, and hold the people you’ve elected responsible for their action. Everyone can benefit from your questions and the work councillors do to respond. People who’ve never taken the step to make contact themselves can see how easy it is and how helpful councillors can be.
A handful of brilliant volunteers have collected councillors’ contact details for 70 of the 150 councils in PlanningAlerts (thank you Pip, Daniel and Katska!). Let us know if your council is missing and we’ll prioritise making this new feature available to you. If you’d like to help collect local councillor information, please contact us—we’d love your help to make this available to everyone.
Now it’s time to put your councillors to work for you through PlanningAlerts.
Right now the UK is politically divided on whether or not to leave the European Union and the mood in many quarters is ugly. It seems that there is a very strong chance that the forthcoming Brexit referendum could swing in favour of the Leave vote, something that seemed unimaginable a few years ago. The main reason for most people wanting to leave is because they are concerned with the UK’s rapid rate of population growth. This article is by Michael Bayliss (President of Sustainable Population Australia Victoria and Tasmania Branch) and Mark Allen (Population, Permaculture and Planning)
A proportion of the blame can be placed on those who have a narrow vision of what it is to be British in the 21st century and who are often misled by those parts of the media that take a more sensationalist approach.
However, the left also need to bear some of the responsibility because they have for far too long placed the topic of population in the politically incorrect basket. With net migration last year coming in at 300,000, people have a right to be concerned, especially when there is no end point to this rate of growth in sight. What is all the more concerning is that the refusal by many on the left to engage on this important issue has allowed the right to exploit this to their advantage by peddling all kinds of fear and untruths. Sadly it appears to be working.
So what lessons are there to be learned here in Australia? There is a parallel because we too are experiencing rapid population growth with net immigration in 2015 at 168 000, so the impact here is larger on a per capita basis.
While it may appear that this would be tempered somewhat by the sheer size of the Australian landmass, this population growth is centered mainly around the Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane conurbations. Until there are jobs, infrastructure and the political will, our boundless plains will continue to be just that. Considering that these plains are mostly desert and rangeland, there is an argument that they are mostly not suitable for new urban settlement anyway, so the focus is very much on our narrow strip of green along the Eastern seaboard. To put this in perspective, the populations of Sydney and Melbourne are growing by 1600 and 1760 a week respectively and people are beginning to feel it.
Meanwhile the government (and just about everyone else) are currently doing a good job of keeping our high rate of immigration away from the public radar. Instead we keep reinforcing the association in the minds of many people of migration with refugees. As John Howard famously promoted this very misunderstanding when he said on the radio 2014:
“One of the reasons why it’s so important to maintain that policy is that the more people think our borders are being controlled, the more supportive they are in the long term of high levels of immigration...And one of the ways that you maintain public support for that is to communicate to the Australian people a capacity to control our borders and to decide who and what people and when come to this country.”
However, the wool cannot be pulled over our eyes forever as the negative consequences of population growth only keep intensifying. Eventually more and more people will join the dots and it is then that we face the threat of the fear- mongering far right taking a foothold.
Do we really have to wait until then? If we engage in sensible rational discourse now about what constitutes a sustainable rate of growth we can avoid all of this. This means that the left have to come to the table. If the issue continues to be ignored we could end up with a situation similar to what is going on in the United Kingdom and it will leave the topic in the hands of those who feed off fear and hate.
This issue is only going to get bigger as Australia's population continues to grow by a new Adelaide approximately every three years. People of compassion need to be the ones who set the tone for the conversations that will ultimately come. If the compassionate fail in this responsibility, they will create a void where people with bigoted views will take centre stage.
Australia is a multicultural country with a proud tradition of supporting refugees and this needs to be the central message on the left. We do not need to be an apologist for the rapid population growth that is being used to justify an economic ponzi scheme.
It is time to put left and right ideologies aside and focus thoughtfully on delivering the most equitable and compassionate outcomes for all people and the earth as a whole. How rapidly we grow our population and how we distribute that population should be part of that discussion.
The views in this article do not necessarily correspond with the views of Sustainable Population Australia
This bad news is from Whitehorse where some areas are famous for their bush areas and trees and now the government plans destroying a lot of it and people are angry - do add your voice in support. We are supposed to grow more trees not destroy them like vandals.
Dear Friends of the Trees in Whitehorse
The trees and vegetation along the railway corridor in Laburnum, Blackburn, Nunawading, Mitcham and Heatherdale are under dire threat due to the level crossing removals at Blackburn and Heatherdale Roads and the construction of the southern route for the shared use path from Middleborough Road to Heatherdale Road.
A total of 450 (out of 550 trees within the project works zone) will be lost in Blackburn and a further 200 of 250 trees in the Heatherdale area will be removed or are threatened with removal in the near future. Indeed many trees have already been removed.
The natural landscape of our suburbs is being destroyed arbitrarily by a consortium that views trees as mere impediments to their 'development at all costs' mentality.
The 80+% of trees slated for removal within the Blackburn level crossing removal project works area is an absolutely appalling figure.
As most Blackburn residents know the carnage has already started with the loss of many trees near Blackburn Station including beautiful 100+ year old Oak Trees and other trees of great historic value.
Even the trees that the tree society committee thought had been saved following six months of negotiations with the level crossing removal authority (LXRA) will now be removed. We had reached an agreement with the authority that 47 of the 63 Cypress Pines on council land in Morton Park could be saved however at a site meeting two days ago an authority spokesman stated that the trees will now have to be cut down. These historic trees are over 100 years old and need to be saved.
The spokesman gave dubious reasons for their removal - so much for negotiations 'in good faith'; the Blackburn and wider community has been treated cynically and very shabbily by the LXRA.
In addition it appears that all of the trees in the Blackburn Station Gardens will be removed except for the Palm Trees and two small trees near the rotunda - the Blackburn Village is being destroyed before our eyes!
Can you allow this to happen without putting up a fight?
There are a number of initiatives that you can be involved with to help mitigate this tree and vegetation vandalism by the LXRA:
1. Help establish a fighting fund to support an independent consulting arborist assessment and report on the trees as well as any legal and expert witness fees associated with an anticipated VCAT Hearing. You can do this by donating money to the Blackburn and District Environment Protection Fund targeted specifically to the 'Save the Trees' campaign. Please donate online at www.blackburnenviro.wordpress.com or send a cheque to the fund via PO Box 210, Blackburn, 3130. Your donation will be most welcome (and it's tax deductible).
2. Write and/or email to express your anger and concerns to local ALP upper house MP Shaun Leane at [email protected] or PO Box 4307, Knox City Centre, Vic., 3152.
3. Write and/or email to express your anger and concerns to the Premier of Victoria, the Hon Daniel Andrews at [email protected] or 517A Princes Highway, Noble Park, Vic., 3174.
4. Write and/or email Whitehorse council stating how devastating this loss will be and urging council to become more active in the fight to save the trees - particularly those on council land and in private ownership. You can also advocate for council to fight for suitable replacement planting programs locally and fair financial compensation to council and local residents for any tree losses on their land.
Letters to council should be mailed to Jeff Green (General Manager City Development), cc'd to the CEO (Noelene Duff) and local Ward councillors Andrew Munroe and Denise Massoud ( for Blackburn) and councillors Philip Daw and Ben Stennett (for Mitcham and Heatherdale).
The Whitehorse Council mailing address is:
Whitehorse City Council
Locked Bag 2
Nunawading Delivery Centre VIC 3131.
Email addresses for council officers and councillors follow the same format as that for Jeff Green i.e. jeff.green[AT]whitehorse.vic.gov.au
5. Contact the Blackburn and/or Heatherdale Level Crossing Authorities to voice your concerns. The Blackburn Level Crossing Removal Authority contact is Kerilyn Wyatt at [email protected] or telephone 1800 762 667.
The Heatherdale Level Crossing Authority email address is [email protected] or telephone 1800 762 667.
6. Also write a letter or email the Whitehorse Leader on this issue (feel free to use the information provided above in your correspondence). The contact journalist is Paddy Naughton at [email protected]
7. Contact 'The Age' and/or 'Herald-Sun' newspapers via the Letters to the Editor section or through their Urban Affairs/Environment journalists.
8. The tree society will probably be organising a Public Rally in Morton Park and/ or the Blackburn Station Gardens in the near future to show our support for the trees and our local natural landscape. If you want to help organise or participate in this rally please contact me by return email or phone 0413 457 184.
Please forward this information through your networks and send your emails and letters of protest asap as suggested.
We need to show the Level Crossing Removal Authorities and the ALP politicians that we have the weight of numbers on our side.
Thank you in anticipation.
Regards
David Berry
President
For the Blackburn and District Tree Preservation Society Inc. committee
Here cdb poet, Brolga-Brolga, tells a moral tale of how a number of neighbours clubbed together to speculate on their adjacent land, but when they tried to buy again, they were already priced out of the market. With homage to Barry Humpreys who wrote The Highett Waltz, sung by Dame Edna, and linked to here.
The pressure is on in our quiet locations
The people who come here are not on vacations
They’re here to stay or so they believe it
The traffic’s horrendous no laws can relieve it
Our peaceful suburbs are in constant disruption
As developers demolish and dig deep for construction
The roads are adorned with red tape and “no access”
Impeding our progress with no sign of success.
Because all the hordes buy our houses galore
One group of people saw their chance to the fore
They got together all 8 neighbours next door
And conjured a sale, a bonanza for all
With planning awry it was well worth a try
To ruin the street but escape with their prize
A premium was paid for these 8 in a row
But for the old friends and neighbours ‘twas a terrible blow
The 8 Bay Road vendors raced away with their gains
And searched the bay suburbs, taking great pains
To find houses in line with their new found riches ,
With sun-decking, en- suites and brand new kitchens
Alas and alack they found only thin pickings
The houses all small and in very poor settings
As month after month they searched the “for sales”
The prices raced right past their premium gains
Meanwhile back in Bay Road, the 8 modest houses
Lie in ruins amid the remains of their gardens
They will be replaced with a 6 storey building,
of 50 apartments, the council unyielding
To grief stricken neighbours, their lives all in tatters
And the council kept saying "what on Earth does it matter?"
So, it’s no longer just normal and quiet ‘round Highett,
It’s constant construction, you just cannot fight it
The neighbours who stayed in Bay Road are defeated
Some internal peace needs be created.
But there will be no peace with those who absconded
and left them the mess to which they are now bonded
These 8 made so little in real estate terms
It’s a hard lesson and one we should learn.
With high immigration the prices will rise
and your fat sum of 1 million will soon take a dive
"Oh only a million, you might try a flat .."
Forget house and garden say "bye- bye to that."
You may have noticed that three articles suddenly disappeared from the site a day ago, then the site disappeared. It has been restored but we have to manually input those articles again. Although most of the problems are solved and we have not lost our site, there may still be some problems in next few days. We apologise for these.
Arguably one of the most successful actions of the Australian Greens has been the reaction to their Democracy for Sale website. This site allowed the media and public to readily access information on ‘who gave what to whom’ and has, (albeit grudgingly), forced some governments to make changes to the funding regime. But more importantly it showed that political donations were not just for buying favours, they were also about changing government policies or legislation to suit the donor at the expense of the general public, including their right to protest. And when it came to getting legislation changed there was none more successful than the development industry. Paul Keating became involved in 2006 saying that New South Wales (NSW) property developers were sending a wall of money to the planning minister. Of course is wasn't only in NSW, West Australia (WA) was the home of the infamous 1980s “WA Inc.”, referring to corporate deals with government under Premier Brian Bourke. WA Greens Senator Ludlam would know this from the findings of the WA Corruption and Crime Commission report.
All of this makes it surprising that Senator Ludlum , when speaking in parliament[1] about the Transforming Perth Study (a joint study by the Property Council of Australia, the Office of Senator Scott Ludlam ) would state:
“ It has been an unexpected joy working with the Property Council and a cohort of developers that they brought in to keep our feet on the ground. My thanks go to William De Haer and to Joe Lenzo, the Executive Director of the Property Council of Australia, for their committed work in bringing this report to fruition...”
Although this plan, ‘Transforming Perth’, did include provisions for light rail, cycleways and green ways, and aimed to stop urban sprawl by utilizing existing infrastructure, it was still Urban Consolidation, a term that has become synonymous with ‘Sardine suburbs’ and is now replaced with a less confronting name –‘Smart Growth’. But when you consider that developer-related corruption in NSW recently saw 11 Liberal politicians resign or stood down in just 9 months, 8 councils sacked in 5 years , 19 corruption inquiries by ICAC that led to 14 prosecutions, then Senator Ludlum’s gushing endorsement of developers suggest he is at best naïve. He is also at odds with some of his Green colleagues, like David Shoebridge, who argued that:
“ the Greens continue to press for community need to be put ahead of developer greed at this most grass roots level of government”
During his speech Senator Ludlam went on to say:
“This new study was commissioned... to take a long, hard look at what has happened in Australian cities in the last 50 or 60 years... Perth does have a good public transport network, but it simply has not kept pace with the growth of the city...”
Well what happened in the last 50 or 60 years was that the population of Australia grew from 7.5 to 24 million. Perth now contains over 2 million with a growth rate that reached 2.5%, the fastest in the nation, adding 346,000 more people in the decade since 2001. This explains why the transport system was overwhelmed. NO major city in Australia has been able to keep up with the extra infrastructure demand created by explosive population growth. Advocating, or even accepting accelerated population growth as a norm is tantamount to endorsing the unsustainable growth economics of the major parties, whose policies create all the environmental mayhem that the Greens deplore. As an example the water flow into Perth's dams has slumped by 80% since 1970 and is predicted to decrease even more in the future. Desalination plants, re cycling and underground water supplies help but are energy intensive and cannot supply cheap water to manufacturing, let alone agriculture.
Preventing urban sprawl is of course essential because we cannot afford to lose our best agricultural land, native forests or open spaces to endless housing. But Perth's sprawl has now extended in a strip 240kms along the coast. This has occurred because people want to live near the beach, where it is cooler. Temperatures across the world are rising due to climate change but in cities they have climbed much faster due to the Urban Heat Island effect – the heat retention created by roads and buildings and loss of vegetation which is more prevalent in regions with higher density housing.
But the most alarming section of Senator Ludlam’s speech was the scale of the proposal:
”The Transforming Perth study identified more than 1,500 hectares of land along seven high-capacity transit corridors in Perth and showed that if you built medium density dwellings, .....along these corridors-of four or five storeys, you could potentially fit between 94,000 and 250,000 dwellings along these corridors...”
Using the lower figure of 94,000 dwellings that equates to about 200,000 to 300,000 people and will require employment for around 100,000 in a state with sharply declining opportunities. The term ‘Smart Growth’[2] was coined as a way of convincing sceptical residents that putting more people into their suburbs was the right way to go, that it would utilize existing infrastructure and cut transport problems. But it hasn't worked out like that because existing suburbs lack the infrastructure for such increases in population. There will not be enough schools[3] or hospitals, water, sewerage or power facilities. Furthermore their construction will be more expensive because of the higher land prices, because land prices increase in proportion to population density. Medium density housing is not, in fact more affordable because prices are a function of supply and demand. Nor is it a ‘green’ solution since it does not reduce the human footprint (currently estimated at 6.25ha./person in Australia). Instead, medium density adds to the Australian footprint since higher densities provide less opportunity to collect enough solar or water. They are unfriendly to vegetable gardens, they don’t permit outdoor clothes-drying and they are more reliant on air conditioning. New house construction also adds to Greenhouse emissions. A two bedroom house creates 80 tonnes of CO2 equivalent. Our economic dependency on housing has left us with high personal debt – totalling $1.8 trillion with one of the world’s highest debt to GDP ratios, setting Australia on a course of reduced personal wealth for the bulk of Australians and the prospect of ever rising greenhouse gas emissions.
On the plus side Senator Scott Ludlam received the Planning Champion Award for his collaborative work with the Property Council and AUDRC "Transforming Perth". It is a plan which will cater for population growth (of which more than half is government-engineered) for perhaps 10 years. After that, well perhaps we go to 10 stories? And after that…?
From Russia Insider: Believe it or not, but these guys happen to be the smartest people in American politics right now, and they have predicted the course of the elections better than anybody so far.
They think Hillary is going to tank and get completely stomped by Trump. Worth a listen. They've been right so far.
An earlier version of this article was published here on 30/4/16. Comments were posted by ecoengine and Denis K on 3/5/16 and by quark on 4/5/16.
In the Australian Federal elections to be held on 2 July 2016, voters who support each of the policies listed below, are entitled to know whether each candidate asking for his/her vote will, if elected, try to implement that policy. We intend to ask each candidate, including the sitting member, his/her intentions should he/she be successful. Each response, or lack of response, will be posted here, to candobetter.net. Please feel encouraged to express your views about these proposals as comments or, when we make that feature available, to vote on them.
Effective #governmentParticipation" id="governmentParticipation">government participation in the economy
1. #governmentOwnedEnterprises" id="governmentOwnedEnterprises">Government owned enterprises: Seek to establish government owned enterprises in all significant sectors of the economy where they don't already exist: insurance, banking, real estate, funeral services, car retail, car hire, passenger airlines, buses, rail, sea, road and air freight, mining, tourism, supermarkets and other retail outlets, etc.
2. #rebuildManufacturing" id="rebuildManufacturing">Rebuild manufacturing: Re-build a large Australian manufacturing sector through (1) the establishment of government-owned manufacturing enterprises and (2) tariffs to protect private manufacturing companies from unfair overseas competition;
3. #sovereignControlOfWealth" id="sovereignControlOfWealth">Sovereign control of Australia's wealth: Outlaw the sale of Australian land, natural resources and built resources to non-citizens. Long-term leases to foreign corporations also to be forbidden.
4. #endPrivatisation" id="endPrivatisation">End privatisation: Past privatisations include Telstra (formerly Telecom), the Commonwealth bank and state banks, public transport, insurance, electricity, water. Conduct a public audit of all privatisations since 1983 including the recent sale of the Port of Melbourne. Seek to reverse these privatisations as far as possible;
5. #endCorporatisation" id="endCorporatisation">End corporatisation of government services: Corporatisation is generally recognised as the first step towards outright privatisation. Government services be given a charter broader than just to achieve the maximum profit regardles of other outcomes. Charters should include to provide training, career structure, job security and decent wages to employees, to protect the environment, and to provide good service.
6.#withdrawFromTransPacificPartnership" id="withdrawFromTransPacificPartnership">Trans-Pacific Partnership: Withdraw Australia from the TPP agreement. The TPP was negotiated in secret behind closed doors. It has little to do with trade. In many areas the TPP forbids our government from acting to protect the interests of citizens and the environment where a corporation can claim that such measures reduce its profitabily;
7. #freeSocialnetworks" id="freeSocialnetworks">Free Internet social networks: The government seek to establish alternatives to Facebook, Google, Twitter and YouTube. These social networks are to respect the privacy of their users and be transparently administered. Rather than being funded by advertising, these services should be funded by general revenue. (Given that YouTube is now offering to remove advertising for an annual fee, it surely stands to reason that many Australia Internet users would be prepared to pay through the taxation system to be free of advertising.)
8. #openSource" id="openSource">Open-source software: Promote the use of free open-source software by (1) requiring all government and statutary authorities to use the Linux operating system, and open-source applications such as the Libre Office suite in place of the Microsoft Office Suite and (2) Establish a public fund to adequately remunerate producers of open-source intellectual property including software.
9. #smallBusinessPremises" id="smallBusinessPremises">Premises for small business: Acquire or build suitable premises for use by small businesses, retailers and food producers. The affordable rents and charges should be affordable and not a barrier to capable people being able tpo set up their own businesses;
10. #reduceMigration" id="reduceMigration">Reduce migration: Reduce Australia's net migration to zero. Net migration should reamin atr zero at least until such time as we can know that no other native Australian animal is threatened with extinction because of the loss of its habitat to accommodate newcomers. Require the Victorian government to dismantle the "Live in Victoria" web-site as immigration is a federal, and not state, responsibility. See #foreignPolicy">Foreign Policy on refugees;
11. #stopClearingNativeForests" id="stopClearingNativeForests">Stop the clearing of native forests: Whether for throw-away paper products or building products, the logging of native forests be outlawed. Only timber from plantations must be used;
12. #stopKillingNativeWildlife" id="stopKillingNativeWildlife">Stop the killing of native wildlife: Outlaw the killing of native Australian wildlife. Re-build destroyed forests and grasslands and repopulate them with the native species which previously lived in those regions or else similar species where those species are extinct;
13. #reusableBevarageContainers" id="reusableBevarageContainers">Reusable bevarage containers: require that all beverages be stored in standardised reusable bevarage containers for which refunds are to be paid. Refunds for the smallest bevarage containers should be no less than 50c. Refunds for larger bevarage containers should be more. Outlaw the use of throw-away drink cans;
14. #stopBuiltInObselescence" id="stopBuiltInObselescence">Stop builtin obselescence: Outlaw the deliberate manufacture of artefacts to break, wear down prematurely or to fail due to lack of spare parts. Outlaw the importation of such artefacts;
15. #recycleOrganicwaste" id="recycleOrganicwaste">Recycle organic waste: Organic waste to be recycled as garden compost or in larger specially built sites;
16. #eliminateWastefulPackaging" id="eliminateWastefulPackaging">Eliminate wasteful packaging: Impose a tax on the volume of any packaged goods to provide an incentive to eliminate wasteful packaging that adds to the quantity of landfill at garbage tips.
17. #localProductionAndConsumption" id="localProductionAndConsumption">Local production and consumption: Encourage the local production and consumption of all food and artifacts. Reduce the need for importation from overseas and transport over long distances;
18. #relocalisation" id="relocalisation">Relocalisation: Work premises for the public service or government statutary authorities to be relocated close to where people live. Private sector to be encouraged to do the same. Over time this will reduce the need for cars, public transport and roads and should allow most to cycle or walk to work;
Providing for #basicNeeds" id="basicNeeds">Basic Needs
Basic needs: #fullEmployment" id="fullEmployment">Full employment in secure and fulfilling occupations
19. #jobGuarantee" id="jobGuarantee">Job guarantee: Federal government guarantee a job to everyone not employed by the private sector, local or state governments.
21. #onTheJobTraining" id="onTheJobTraining">On-the-job training, career progression: re-establish on-the-job training and career progression in all government departments and statutory authorities as an alternative to training at TAFE colleges and tertiary institutions; Encourage private enterprises to do the same;
22. #reducedWorkingHours" id="reducedWorkingHours">Reduced working hours: Reduction of the working week to 35 hours. Given the repeated claims of Australia's increased economic efficiency since 1983, the economy should easily be able to manage if working hours were reduced to 35 hours per week, just for a start. Outlaw compulsory overtime. Require employers to offer workers, who don't need a full wage, to work reduced and flexible hours;
23. #closeDownSweatShops" id="closeDownSweatShops">Close down sweat-shops: Governments must proactively act to close down factories, which use low-paid workers working for long hours. Re-introduce the state award system;
24. #commonwealthEmploymentService" id="commonwealthEmploymentService">Commonwealth Employment Service: re-establish the Commonwealth Employment Service (CES), which was dismantled in 1998 by the Howard Government. The plethora of private job agencies which replaced the CES has not been nearly as effective in helping job-seekers to find full, part-time or temporary employment;
25. #endSection457visas" id="endSection457visas">End Section 457 visas: Only allow employers to employ skilled workers where it can be shown that no worker in Australia can fill the vacancy. (Were the #commonwealthEmploymentService">Commonwealth Employment Service reconstituted, it would become much easier to fill vacancies from within Australia);
26. #stopEducationFundingCuts" id="stopEducationFundingCuts">Stop education funding cuts: Reverse the funding cuts to tertiary institutions and TAFE colleges;
27. #abolishUniversityFees" id="abolishUniversityFees">Abolish university fees: Make tertiary education free as it is in Argentina, Brazil, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Norway, Slovenia, Sweden and Syria;
28. #provideForStudentsLivingNeeds" id="provideForStudentsLivingNeeds">Provide for students' living needs: Re-establish the Whitlam Government's Tertiary Education Assistance Scheme (TEAS) so that University students don't have to work part-time to support themselves;
29. #strongerTertiaryArtsFaculties" id="strongerTertiaryArtsFaculties">Stronger Tertiary Arts Faculties: More funding for university arts faculties. Provide more careers in the public service for Arts graduates. Encourage the private sector to do the same;
30. #housing" id="housing">Housing: Ensure that each Australian citizen has secure affordable shelter. Require of landlords to offer to renew tenancies except where renewal would cause hardship to the landlord;
31. #publicLiabilityInsurance" id="publicLiabilityInsurance">Public liability insurance: Establish public liablity insurance as it exists in New Zealand. No-one, who has organised a public event and has taken all reasonable precautions, should fear financial ruin as a result of any mishap;
#democracy" id="democracy">Democracy, Transparency and Accountability
32. #constituencyMeetings" id="constituencyMeetings">Federal electorate constituency meetings: Each member of the House of Representatives be required to attend meetings of his/her constituents during election campaigns and at regular specified intervals;
33. #fullAccounting" id="fullAccounting">Full accounting of taxation and public expenditure: All losses and gains should be accounted for in the Federal Budget. Losses should include: unutilised skill and experience by the unemployed and under-employed. The budget must give estimates of the value of worth of government services which cannot be quantified monetarily;
34. #transparencyWithThePrivateSector" id="transparencyWithThePrivateSector">Transparency with the private sector: Except where national security may be compromised, no 'commercial in-confidence' contract to be signed with any member of the private sector at the initiative of the government. Discriminate in favour of contractors who do not require 'commercial in-confidence' contracts;
35. #allSidesOfStory" id="allSidesOfStory">Public newsmedia to give all sides of the story: Where facts are disputed in any conflict, whether domestic or international, the charters of the ABC and SBS require that they give both sides of the conflict the opportunity to put their case to the viewing public. (See also #foreignPolicy">Foreign policy);
36. #directDemocracy" id="directDemocracy">Direct Democracy: In the next term of parliament, put to voters a referendum to adopt Direct Democracy as practised in Switzerland;
37. #usepublicDiscussionToPreventWar" id="usepublicDiscussionToPreventWar">Use public discussion to prevent war: Invite representatives of foreign governments with which Australia is in conflict to put their case to the Australian public on television in interviews. Where possible, representatives of Australia put Australia's case in interviews on those countries' newsmedia (for example RT and PressTV);
38. #recogniseTheElectedGovernmentOfSyria" id="recogniseTheElectedGovernmentOfSyria">Recognise the elected Government of Syria: Recognise the government of President Bashar al-Assad as the legitimate government of Syria. The Syrian government enjoys far more popular support than the Australian government or any of the Western governments opposed to it, as verified in the June 1914 Presidential election and the Parliamentary elections of April 2016;
39. #endSanctionsAgainstSyria" id="endSanctionsAgainstSyria">End Sanctions against Syria: End sanctions and invite the Syrian government to re-establish its embassy. The sanctions were imposed and the Syrian ambassador was expelled on the absurd fabricated pretext that the Syrian government had massacred its own supporters at Houla in 2013. Remunerate Syria for its trouble and expense;
40. #opposeTheTerroristWarAgainstSyria" id="opposeTheTerroristWarAgainstSyria">Oppose the terrorist war against Syria: Oppose the illegal proxy terrorist war against the people of Syria which began in March 2011. By one estimate, that war has so far cost the lives of 250,000 Syrians, including 80,000 members of the Syrian Armed forces;
41. #stopAustraliansFromGoingToWarAgainstSyria" id="stopAustraliansFromGoingToWarAgainstSyria">Stop Australians from going to war against Syria: Support Australian Federal Police actions to prevent Australians from going abroad to fight against the Syrian government. Seek collaboration with the Syrian authorities to bring any Australian citizen, known to have participated in that war against the Syrian people, to justice;
42. #compensateSyriaForCareOfIraqiRefugees" id="compensateSyriaForCareOfIraqiRefugees">Compensate the Syrian government for care of Iraqi refugees: Remunerate the Syrian government for the trouble and expense it was put to for having to care for 1,300,000 refugees who fled to Syria as a result of the illegal wars of 1991 and 2003 and sanctions against Iraq in which Australia participated;
43. #peacefulResolutionOfPalestineIsraelConflict" id="peacefulResolutionOfPalestineIsraelConflict">Support peaceful resolution of conflict: Act to bring an end to the Palestine/Israel conflict that will allow all sides to live in peace.
44. #dismantleIsraeliNuclearWeapons" id="dismantleIsraeliNuclearWeapons">Dismantle Israel's nuclear weapons stockpile: The dismantlement of Israel's illegally acquired nuclear weapons be part of the peace settlement;
45. #mordechaiVanunu" id="mordechaiVanunu">Free Mordechai Vanunu: Demand that Israel free former Australian resident Mordechai Vanunu who revealed to the world Israel's illegal possession of nuclear weapons. Offer Mordechai Vanunu asylum in Australia;
46. #endTheftOfPalestinianLand" id="endTheftOfPalestinianLand">End the theft of Palestinian land: Oppose the illegal seizure of land by Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank and the Golan Heights;
47. #endDictatorialRuleOfTurkey" id="endDictatorialRuleOfTurkey">End dictatorial rule of Turkey: demand that the United Nations act to end the dictatorial and criminal conduct of the government of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. This conduct includes: giving arms, supplies and sanctuary to terrorists fighting against the neighnouring government of Syria, the arrest of border guards who attempted to prevent supplies reaching the terrorists, allowing petroleum stolen from Syria by ISIS terrorists to be pipelined into Turkey and sold, the prosecution of jounalists critical of his government of terrorism, shooting down a Russian fighter in neighbouring Syria;
48. #opposeInvasionOfYemen" id="opposeInvasionOfYemen">Oppose the invasion of Yemen. Ask that the United Nations take action against the invasion of Yemen by the Saudi Arabian dictatorship. Condemn the supply of banned cluster bombs made in the United States and their use by Saudi Arabia;
49. #MH17" id="MH17">MH17: Demand an open public enquiry into destruction of Malay Airlines Flight MH17 in which 28 Australians were amongst the 298 killed on 17 July 2014. Request that the MH17 Black Box given to the Netherlands by East Ukranian rebels, records of communications between Kiev air traffic controllers and MH17 and the United States' government satellite surveillance recordings of flight MH17 be released be made available for that inquiry, as the Russian government has done with its satellite surveillance recordings;
50. #supportDemocracyInUkraine" id="supportDemocracyInUkraine">Support democracy in Ukraine: Support those Ukrainians in Eastern Ukraine who are defending themselves against the regime that was installed in the CIA-orchestrated coup of January 2014;
51. #crimea" id="crimea">Crimea: Recognise the secession of Crimea to Russia from Ukraine in February 2014, which was overwhelmingly supported by the inhabitants of Crimea in a referendum, as a legitimate act of self-determination and self-defence;
#humanRights" id="humanRights">Human rights: Protection of human rights, civil liberties, freedom of speech and proper legal conduct by the authorities
52. #asylumToWhistleblowers" id="asylumToWhistleblowers">Asylum to whistleblowers: Request that the United States' government publicly try Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning before a jury for their alleged crimes as requested by them. Should this request be refused, offer political asylum to Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning. Should the United States obstruct Australia's attempts to grant asylum, raise this issue at the United Nations. (Also see #mordechaiVanunu">Free Mordechai Vanunu);
53. #julianAssange" id="julianAssange">Julian Assange: Demand that the Swedish government guarantee that Julian Assange won't be forcibly repatriated to the United States from Sweden should he go to Sweden to face charges of rape. If the Swedish government does not comply, demand that the UK government to end the arbitrary detention of Australian whistleblower Julian Assange and allow him to return to Australia. ;
54. #endDragnetSurveillance" id="endDragnetSurveillance">End surveillance of our phone calls, Internet browsing and e-mail: End the dragnet surveillance of all of our private communications by the United States' CIA and NSA, Britain's GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 and Australia's ASIO and ASIS as revealed by Edward Snowden. As Snowden has revealed, dragnet surveillance has not prevented one act of terrorism. Only allow surveillance of individuals or groups where there is reason to fear terrorism or other illegal acts;
55. #coronialInquestIntoPortArthurMassacre" id="coronialInquestIntoPortArthurMassacre">Port Arthur Massacre: as required by law, conduct a coronial inquest into the murder of 35 Australians at Port Arthur on 28 April 1996 - the largest mass murder in Australia's history. The suppose evidence against Martin Bryant has never been tested in a court of law. All forensic evidence and eyewitness testimony proves Martin Bryant innocent of the crime. The only 'evidence' of Martin Bryant's guilt consists of a supposed confession made after he had been illegally interrogated in solitary confinement for 5 months. Prosecute all those known to have acted unlawfully against Martin Bryant;
56. #martinBryant" id="martinBryant">Martin Bryant: Allow friends and relatives of Martin Bryant to see him in person so that they can verify for themselves the claim by the prison governor that Martin Bryant doesn't want to see anybody;
How you can help
If you agree with most, or all, of these policies, please consider standing as a candidate yourself at he next election if it is not possible for you to stand in this election. If you are a candidate who supports any of the policies listed above or if you know of any such candidate, please let us know so that we can promote that candidate and lift that candidate's profile.
Please feel encouraged to also promote these policies and candidates who support these policies on Twitter, FaceBook, other discussion forums or your own web-site. If you can think of any other policies we should promote, or even if you oppose or don't altogether agree with some of these policies, please also let us know by posting a comment below.
On Friday June 3rd 2016, the Simplicity Institute screened its newly produced film 'A Simpler Way: Crisis as Opportunity'. The film is essentially a documentary of the Institute's attempts to create a simple living community along permaculture lines. Following a public invitation to participate a group of mostly fairly young people participated in this experimental community on a rural property in Gippsland. The project involved them growing and preparing their own food, and building the necessary infrastructure which included: houses for each other; a communal living area and kitchen in a large shed; vegetable patches; composting toilet systems, etc.
Obviously such a life requires possesion or development of a range of skills and a breadth of skills that individuals in 'developed' economies typically do not possess. The specialisation of work in such 'developed' societies tends to result in people having rather specific skills, and also perhaps excludes some basic skills that are quite important within an intentionally self-sufficient community. Nevertheless, it seems they managed fairly well in relation to sharing and developing skills in carpentry, vegetable growing, etc. But the experiment seems to have revealed one fundamental, essential skill that these people sometimes lacked, and which it seems is perhaps one that is extremely difficult to develop. That skill is the skill of living together. The skill of getting on, dealing with disagreements and making decisions in a way that does not lead to some people opting out of the experiment altogether. If we are to transition to any type of more humane economy then this is perhaps the key skill we need. The ability to live as a community in integrated, caring and selfless ways may turn out to be the most damaged part of our society as a result of the collective experiment in recent centuries with free-market ideals and the search for happiness through material wealth aided by technological development. And I would suggest that of all the changes necessary in our society, this is going to be the hardest - shaking off our perceptions of ourselves and our perceived entitlements.
Let us consider the difficulties that this small group encountered, and keep in mind that this group consisted of young, fairly fit adults; mostly single and childless. There was only one pre-school age child in the group. But real societies are not like this. Real societies have people who are sick, or invalid. They have many children - and with many children running around in a community which is effectively a combination of construction zone and working farm with sharp tools, and various other hazards then additional precautions need to taken. Things are not so easy, extra work is required - including cordoning off areas, being careful where tools etc are placed, keeping an eye out for children doing dangerous things or moving in dangerous areas. Effort levels and frustration levels are likely to rise. Blame for not keeping children under control, or blame for causes of any - ultimately inevitable - accidents will also introduce new elements of conflict.
And how caring and self-sacrificing are people prepared to be? What if some people are seen as 'not contributing'? Will some in our community look at nursing mothers, invalids, etc through the lens of Malcolm Turnbull's 'lifters and leaners'? Are we to continue to assess people's worth based on their economic contribution? Are we to continue to feel that we should all benefit 'fairly' (i.e according to immediate economic contribution) from the fruits of our collective labours? Because if so, such communities are going to encounter significant, and quite possibly fatal, difficulties. In fact, parenthood and children add incredible amounts of complexity to any community. Who is going to educate them? How? Often parents are very particular, and commonly somewhat inflexible, regarding what ideas and concepts their children should be exposed to and when. There are few other issues as emotionally charged as raising and educating children.
What if some members ask themselves questions along the lines of: why should I be supporting someone else's child? How can I get my own way (on one issue or another)? Now you may think that such thoughts would not arise, or at least not be serious enough to threaten the community. But we must remember that the system of inequalities and elites that we currently have did not arise out of nowhere - it arose in and out of human communities, and quite likely hidden behind this rise were thoughts similar to the above - maybe explicitly expressed, maybe not. What is to stop history repeating itself? If not immediately, almost certainly over time in the absence of express precautions.
It seems that anyone serious about living in such an intentional community - one with all the complexities of a real community - will need to not just re-learn traditional skills of simple production but seriously re-invent themselves. Such a re-invention will no doubt require a complete revision, and some discarding, of notions and ideologies as well as patterns of behaviour and thought. I would suggest that any such re-invention should include a new perception of ourselves - a perception that moves away from notions of selfish pleasure seeking; that moves away from short-term notions of 'fairness' in relation to the sharing of economic outputs, and more towards seeing ourselves as existing not to satisfy our own sefish desires, but as existing for the purpose of serving others. Such a 'service' self-perspective leads thoughts away from our own entitlements and expections of others and towards what more we can do to help others achieve their aims, how we can understand their expectations, and how we can help achieve those.
Today I received an email from GetUp recruiting volunteers to hand out how to vote cards. They referred to success stopping destruction of the Reef (by capitalists), promoting renewable energy, etc....
Everyone who believes in population growth supports a traditional right wing agenda. This includes GetUp, the Greens and all the major political parties. Does GetUp even know what it means when it refers to right wing and left wing?
Open Letter to Paul Oosting, Level 14, 338 Pitt Street, Sydney NSW 2000.
Paul,
Your latest email rant entitled: “Our new weapon against right wingers” implies that you think you, and GetUp, are left wing?
Excerpts from Wikipedia below provide a context to the absurdity of your confusion:
The left–right [political spectrum] is a system of classifying political positions, ideologies, and parties. Left-wing politics and right-wing politics are often presented as opposed, although a particular individual or group may take a left-wing stance on one matter and a right-wing stance on another. In France, where the terms originated, the Left has been called "the party of movement" and the Right "the party of order."[1][2][3][4] The intermediate stance is called centrism and a person with such a position is a moderate.
Amongst published researchers, there is agreement that the Left includes anarchists, communists, socialists, progressives, anti-capitalists, anti-imperialists, anti-racists, democratic socialists, greens, left-libertarians, social democrats, and social liberals.[5][6][7]
Researchers have also said that the Right includes capitalists, conservatives, monarchists, nationalists, neoconservatives, neoliberals, reactionaries, imperialists, right-libertarians, social authoritarians, religious fundamentalists, and traditionalists.[8]
Progressive
Progressivism is a philosophy based on the idea of progress, which asserts that advancement in science, technology, economic development, and social organization are vital to improve the human condition. Progressivism became highly significant during the Age of Enlightenment in Europe, out of the belief that Europe was demonstrating that societies could progress in civility from barbaric conditions to civilization through strengthening the basis of empirical knowledge as the foundation of society.[1] Figures of the Enlightenment believed that progress had universal application to all societies and that these ideas would spread across the world from Europe.[1] Sociologist Robert Nisbet defines five "crucial premises" of the Idea of Progress as being: value of the past; nobility of Western civilization; worth of economic/technological growth; faith in reason and scientific/scholarly knowledge obtained through reason; the intrinsic importance and worth of life on Earth.[2] The term is often used as shorthand for a more or less left-wing way of looking at the world. Beyond this, the meanings of progressivism have varied over time and from different perspectives.[3]
The contemporary common political conception of progressivism in the culture of the Western world emerged from the vast social changes brought about by industrialization in the Western world in the late 19th century, particularly out of the view that progress was being stifled by vast economic inequality between the rich and the poor; minimally regulated laissez-faire capitalism with monopolistic corporations; and intense and often violent conflict between workers and industrialists, thus claiming that measures were needed to address these problems.
The definitions above generally describe a left winger as a progressive anti-capitalist. The fundamental flaw in all of this hypothetical mumbo jumbo is the driving force behind economic development, economic inequality and environmental devastation. That driving force is population growth. Since population and economic growth (a direct consequence of capitalism) are inextricably linked; anyone who supports the former is by definition right wing. GetUp and the Greens are right wing as are all Australia’s political parties with the exception of the Lower Migration party.
Australia’s annual GDP growth has averaged 3.2% since Federation. Population growth has averaged 1.6%. Over the last 2 decades GDP growth has declined and population growth has increased to around 1.8%.
The numbers may seem irrelevant to a relatively innumerate left wing activist who jumps on scientific evidence to support a climate change argument but chooses to ignore it when confronted with the facts about population growth. But these scientific facts are essential for developing coherent political objectives and humane ideology.
Since left wing is described as anti-capitalist you are clearly not left wing. The fuel for capitalism consists of two things. These are currently hydrocarbons and population growth. Each and both are directly responsible for climate change. It is not just hydrocarbons which are causing climate change.
Had Australia’s population growth been zero since Federation only a compound rate of GDP growth of 1.6% would have been required to create the same per capital financial wealth. But because of population growth, environmental damage and infrastructure expansion has occurred.
The primary beneficiaries are big business (capitalism), government and government bureaucracy. Hence all political parties support it.
But the trend has changed. The cost of infrastructure and its expansion is no longer covered by GDP. The reason in Australia is primarily driven by population growth which costs more to support than the economy can generate.
It is over. The era of left wing and right wing is over. It is legendary and farcical in the 21st century. There is only right wing or population stabilization; because the latter is the only way to deliver the benefits the left wing cannot deliver with this element missing from its agenda. GetUp is neither progressive nor anti-capitalist. It targets only specific consequences of its own political agenda.
There are only two “developed” city states on the planet with comparable rates of population growth to Australia. These are Singapore and Qatar. Both are authoritarian regimes with far lower costs of infrastructure, and infrastructure expansion, than Australia. Their population grows due to expatriates, who have no claim on social welfare and no rights to citizenship in these city states.
The only other countries with similar rates of population growth are under developed. Most are in Africa where GDP per capita is roughly 4% that of Australia’s and the birth rate per woman is roughly 6.
Australia stands out as a country retaining a reactionary, non-progressive, mass migration policy which makes no ethical, environmental or economic sense.
Another example of GetUp’s right wing extremism is support for refugees while actively promoting a political agenda of mass migration of the relatively fortunate; who all cost the economy more than it can afford to support them. So GetUp’s delusionary and allegedly “left wing” dogma drives the displacement of Australians from jobs using a skilled migration program which is a reactionary policy dating back to Federation. This same policy displaces genuine refugees from the opportunity to enter Australia.
All political parties, including the Greens, are right wing according to universally accepted definitions of right wing. They display common agendas with their support for migration-based pro population growth extremism:
• Pro capitalist extremism
• Reactionary defence of the status quo
• Conservative defence of the status quo
• Anti progressive
• Anti Green
Please explain to me how GetUp’s support for migration based pro population growth extremism meets any of the traditional definitions of “Left Wing”.
I respectfully refer you to my blog which might provide information of value in your educational development:
/blog/310
Thanks and yours sincerely,
Michael S.
David Suzuki says Australia and Canada are ‘full’ and calls country’s immigration policy ‘crazy’. "We plunder southern countries by depriving them of future leaders, and we want to increase our population to support economic growth. It’s crazy!” This translated excerpt situates Suzuki's remarks on numbers in context and is a response to an email recently doing the rounds. Candobetter.net Canadian writer, Tim Murray, has frequently criticised Suzuki for failing to criticise Canada's mass immigration which drives urbanisation and destroys natural habitat. Perhaps, in fact, Suzuki would not speak up like this in a Canadian interview, so savage is the Canadian mass media in its support of the commercial population growth lobby. Apparently hearing about this French interview, Canadian immigration Minister Jason Kenney attempted typical damage-control of his own party's indefensible immigration ideology, by slandering the famous environmentalist Suzuki, as “toxic and irresponsible” on Twitter. He also made remarks that indicated that he expected the mass media to similarly label anyone who disapproved of mass invited economic immigration. Which explains why Canadians fear to speak out about overpopulation. This interview, currently being cycled on email, was conducted by Jean-Michel Demetz and published on 01/07/2013. (Translation by Sheila Newman)
JEAN-MICHEL DEMETZ: In your autobiography, you evoke 'a happy childhood in a racist British-Columbia'. Seven decades later, is Canada right to call itself the most harmonious multicultural society in the world?
SUZUKI: It is a remarkable experiment. The presence of Asiatics is impressive: on the campus of the University of British Columbia one might think one was in Hong Kong! My parents' generation, although born in Canada, continued to intermarry among Japanese. Today 90% of Canadians of Japanese origin marry non-Japanese. In pushing for recognition of the diversity of the multicultural mosaic over the American-style melting pot, Trudeau helped integration.
Whatever their origins, Canadians recognise their common values: respect for differences and preference for peaceful and democratic solutions. This said, the First Nations remain the worst treated. Now the fate of these populations touches me, not only because of what they have suffered, but also becasme they have conserved an authentic relationship with nature. And that link is the greatest gift that they can bestow on us.
JEAN-MICHEL DEMETZ: In Australia environmentalists oppose population growth and immigration on the grounds that natural resources will not sustain them. What do you think of this?
SUZUKI: Oh, I believe that Canada is full too! Even though it's the second largest country in the world, our useful area is small. Our immigration policy is sickening: we pillage countries of the South and deprive them of their future leaders and we want to increase our population in order to increase growth of our economy. It's nuts.
JEAN-MICHEL DEMETZ: It's still a bit selfish to want to close the door behind yourself...
SUZUKI: That doesn't mean that we have no responsibility towards those who have difficulty surviving elsewhere. But there is no more room. All the same, Canada should alway s open its doors to those who suffer from oppression or crisis. During the 1970s, when we took in 50,000 boat people from Vietnam, I was particularly proud of being a Canadian.
At the Planning Backlash and Boroondara Residents Action Group "Mad as Hell event" in Camberwell on Sunday 29th May, 2016, BRAG introduced the following draft Resident's Rights Bill. To indicate your support please email drostmary[AT]gmail.com. Among other things it calls for the setting of population growth targets within OECD averages. It thus nails a continuing problem of the moving target in previous population policy claims. Australia lacks a civil rights code, unlike Europe. Our civil rights used to be implicit in our publicly owned resources and services, like water, Telecom, and power. This draft Residents' Bill of Rights is truly impressive in its ability to identify gaps in Australian residents' rights.
Residents' Bill of Rights
We, the current residents of Melbourne, country and coastal areas of Victoria, call on the government and opposition at all levels to act to protect our homes, communities and cities from over-development.
WE REJECT:
The current trend of excessive population growth through the ever increasing levels of immigration.
The excessive influence of vested interests and lobby groups upon residential planning and government decision making.
The increasing densification of residential areas and the consequent impact on our infrastructure without commensurate infrastructure upgrades at all levels.
The continual changes to planning law and regulations that provides no certainty for the peaceful enjoyment of our neighbourhoods by the current and future residents.
The continual urban sprawl into Melbourne’s green fringe and farming land.
We DEMAND:
• Population growth targets to be limited to sustainable levels based on OECD averages which is currently around 0.63%. (Australia’s rate of growth is currently around 1.7% ).
• Infrastructure be upgraded to meet current needs and kept ahead of requirements to meet our cities population growth requirements.
• A bipartisan planning environment that provides certainty and protects residential areas against densification in any form.
• Councils to be the sole “responsible Authority” for issuing planning permits and building permits.
• VCAT’s role to be confined to resolution of legal planning disputes and ensuring that lawful planning regulations are met.
• FIRB rules and penalties designed and strictly applied to prevent destruction of existing housing stock and neighbourhood character by foreign nationals.
• Expansion and development of regional cities and associated infrastructure to support population growth and lifestyle quality.
• Developer donations be deemed illegal with mandatory disqualification, forfeiture, or dismissal from or of any current or future development.
• Protection of current open space and tree canopy with requirement to retain or replace vegetation on all new or redevelopment sites.
• Government, at all levels, legally required to assess and protect the interests of residents ahead of developers’ interests.
• All planning committees and reference groups must have at reasonable resident representation.
• Legislate to ensure permits can be refused where a poll of residents/owners living within 300m radius of the proposed development indicates objection by the majority of existing residents/owners.
• A national uniform code be developed to define minimum dwelling size, minimum open space per bedroom and maximum occupancy limits.
• Enforceable minimum Victorian building standards regulations administered by an independent authority.
• Any breach of a planning permit or building standards should result in a prosecution by the relevant authority or the State or local Government to ensure proper rectification
• Developers to meet infrastructure costs necessary for new developments including drainage, sewage, water supply, telecommunications, gas and electricity.
• Developers to be required to contribute to a general community/Council infrastructure fund, , based on number of bedrooms or estimated improved value of the property.
• Neighbourhood character, architecture and heritage requirements to be met by every new residential development.
• Establishment and enforcement of resident and visitor car parking standards, for new multi-dwelling developments, at the rate of 0.75 spaces per bedroom, for residents and 0.25 spaces for visitors.
• Character protection for heritage and traditional local shopping strips.
Published & authorized by PLANNING BACKLASH, on behalf of it’s 250
supporting residents' groups in Melbourne, country & coastal areas.
PO Box 1034 Camberwell, Vic. 3124
This article is about the success of the Planning Backlash and Boroondara Residents Action Group "Mad as Hell event" in Camberwell on Sunday 29th May, 2016. It is based on a report by Jack Roach of Boroondara Residents Action Group (BRAG). This meeting also produced a stunning draft Resident's Bill of Rights which candobetter.net encourages you to support.
The Parkview Room at the Camberwell Civic Centre was packed with people from all over Melbourne and the event started right on time. A short introduction reminded everyone that since Melbourne 2030 in 2002, there have been 16 additional plans. These plans have included a review of M2030 and a new plan – Melbourne @5 million - which was itself reviewed later. Those plans were themselves followed by Plan Melbourne which included the 'Reformed Zones'. And now we have Plan Melbourne Refresh plus a Panel review of the zones –'Managing Resident Development'.
It was pointed out that all these changes have required residents to make submissions to a committee or panel whose job it is to make recommendations to the Minister for Planning. It is clear that residents' submissions are ignored. This has just been a ticking the 'consulted with the community box' exercise. Residents are being shut out while developers gain advantage through political donations.
The Mad as Hell event Panel of David Davis, Prof. Michael Buxton and Prof. Bob Birrell made presentations reflecting everyone's concern at what the government is proposing with its intention to push medium and high density into the established suburbs. Dr Buxton suggested that Planning Minister Wynne wants to have 70% of new housing in our established suburbs, which Buxton thought was not possible. The presentations were videoed and should be available soon.
The people in the audience made it very clear that they were very concerned about what is happening right now in their neighbourhoods. They interacted with the three panel members for about an hour.
BRAG proposes a Residents' Bill of Rights
BRAG then introduced a new strategy to give residents a real voice in what happens in their local area as well as what the government is proposing for Melbourne’s future.
A draft Residents’ Bill of Rights (RBR) was proposed (a copy of which was circulated to all prior to the start of the Forum). They were asked to take the copy home, read and consider, and asked to support the Bill. We have published this draft as a separate article. Click here to see the Residents' Bill of Rights draft.
If you like it, email your support to PLANNING BACKLASH –[email protected]
The next step is to campaign to get residents’ rights and that won’t be easy. A lot of help will be needed from residents all over Melbourne.
This news was sent by Marinella Correggia, of the No War Network. The Italian Committee to end the EU sanctions against Syriahttps://bastasanzioniallasiria.wordpress.com/ was created 15 days ago by a group of Italian activists. See also the video in English (and in other languages) embedded below. Shamefully, European Union sanctions against Syria were renewed for one year, yesterday. People who want Syria to survive should not take this lying down.
A huge group of Syrian religious people launched a vibrant call to European Parliamentarians, mayors and people, in English see here: https://bastasanzioniallasiria.wordpress.com/english/. (see also the other languages on the web page)
On the basis of this call, the Committee launched the Campaign to end the sanctions. Part of that is a petition on Change, which everybody in the world can sign here (the petitionis in Italian but the text is the same than the call of the religious people which you can find in English): https://www.change.org/p/parlamentari-sindaci-basta-sanzioni-alla-siria-e-ai-siriani
Also Italian MPs of differents groups issued a resolution towards the Italian government.
We are trying to get the European governments aware of this mobilization. It is enough that one country opposes the renewal and the EU sanctions will be dropped! If anyone of you is close to some politicians/governments, please contact them.
In this 23 minute debate with Jack Rasmus, Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the United States' Treasury, shows that the so-called IMF bailout of Greece's debt to the IMF is not a bailout at all. A bailout is supposed to reduce the debt to a level where the loan can be paid off. The conditions attached to the bailout will force the Greeks to sell off to foreign corporations much of Greece's publicly owned wealth-generating assets. Without those assets, the Greek economy can only be made less able to pay off debt in future. The supposed bailout is no more than an attempt to use the indebtedness from money, which should never, in the first place, have been lent by the IMF to previous corrupt Greek governments, as a pretext to allow corporations to loot Greece's wealth in 2016.
The following article publishes an email sent by Tony Recsei, President of Save our Suburbs NSW, to SOS members and friends. Dated Thursday, 26 May 2016, it is a report on his attendance at a luncheon organised by the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) in Paramatta. The GSC is a growth lobby tool. Here Recsei points out that the 30 minute city does not exist as planners describe it and suggests that the Commission should investigate low density cities where the cost of housing is also low and find out what they are doing right, instead of continuing to visit high density cities. See the SOS NSW blogspot here.
Yesterday I attended a luncheon organized by the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) at their offices in Parramatta. The GSC was formed to lead metropolitan planning for the Greater Sydney Region. Twelve people attended the luncheon, half of them being members of the GSC including chairperson Lucy Turnbull and chief executive officer Sarah Hill. The rest were from various government and non-government organisations.
A pleasant atmosphere prevailed and people talked freely. GSC Social Commissioner Heather Nesbitt introduced the discussion, emphasizing the need for livability and collaboration and trust. Sarah Hill said priorities include preparing district plans, getting out of the office and talking to people. There needs to be plans for a greater Parramatta, the Western Sydney Airport, linking infrastructure with planning, providing advice to the Minister and making awards and grants. Lucy Turnbull said they will try to get a whole of government approach.
In turn we were each invited to say what we felt.
I said:
· Save Our Suburbs focusses on the underlying rationale behind planning in the state. That rationale relates to increasing density. A fundamental tension results as the community does not want increased density. This dichotomy bedevils all attempts at consultation.
· Neither high-profile high-density advocate Professor Peter Newman nor anyone else can give me an example of a high-density city that does not suffer from the ills they claim high-density will alleviate.
· A previous planning minister, Brad Hazard had led a delegation to investigate planning in North America but only visited jurisdictions with high-density policies. They did not visit the more successful cities which happen to have low density policies.
· No advantages claimed for high-density policies stand up to any scrutiny. These policies cause increased congestion, unaffordable housing and adverse health impacts (such as a 70% increase in psychosis). Forcing in high-density when most people want single-residential reduces housing choice. High-density results in excessive greenhouse gas emissions. In high-rise per person energy consumption and embodied energy is double that of single-residential. Such emissions represent 30% of people’s annual emissions while transport represents only 10%.
Lucy Turnbull referred to the “30 minute city” - that is a city divided into sections where people in 30 minutes or less can easily get to work, shops, schools etc. and walk to many destinations. I asked where is such a place. People might initially find a dwelling near their place of work but subsequently change their job without moving house; other members of the household may work or study somewhere else. I pointed such reduction in travel times does not happen in high-density cities. For example Hong Kong has average travel times to work of 47 minutes compared to 35 minutes in Sydney. Also, in Hong Kong only about 20% of people work in the area where they live. This proportion is about the same as in low density Los Angeles. A city with “30 minute” sections is a figment of the imagination.
They asked what North American cities should Brad Hazard have visited. I suggested Houston as an example where houses cost about ¼ of their equivalents in Sydney and suggested the GSC should send a delegation there to see what Houston does right and what it does wrong.
My discussion took about 30 minutes of the 2 hour luncheon time.
As we left one of the GSC members said to me “Keep on keeping us honest”!
Some time back, a friend of mine won a weekend at Allsop's Paddock Retreat in Gobur, Victoria, Australia. She invited me and another person to go there with her. I had to look up Gobur, which I discovered was about 90km from Mt Buller and 260 from Mt Hotham. There was no town there, and the closest towns were to the south, with Yark 10km away and Alexander 22km. Looking at Google Earth I underestimated the size, beauty and number of the trees. It was impossible to guess at the lay of the land. In fact, we spent two nights there in October 2015. It was a new gig and the owners were hoping for a review. It has taken me a long time to write this review because I preferred to finish the paintings I started when I was there. This review is really an artist's review of a good place to paint. Privacy, safety, comfort and unusual and stunning views.
Allsop's Retreat is 37 ha (approx 85 acres) in a shield shape with a plane at the pointy southern end and rolling hills and valleys in the north. The sun crosses sthe property from east to west, creating a splendid play of light and shadows across the heavily wooded paddocks. Guests stay in a two bedroom, verandahed house, specially built to purpose with a potbelly fire and enough sleeping for eight. (One double bed, two bunks, and a large couch.) Pets are welcome and we brought two dogs. The grounds of the guest house are well-fenced to keep pets in and casually patrolled by three retired cows with fetching hairdos.
On the aerial view I have roughed in the disused fences in dotted lines, two dams as blue spots, and pale white contour lines to show the main hills. The thickest trees are the forest which covers the largest hill, providing shelter for birds and kangaroos and a variety of walks amongst quite dramatic scenery. There are three enclosed building areas, with the guesthouse or 'shed' at the base.
Kangaroos travel regularly down from neighboring hills and up into the forest at the top end of the property. A long paddock follows the plane around the hill between the 'shed' and the forest. Along the way there is a picturesque dam amid gum trees. This large paddock is the main domain of the three retired cows.
I have included three paintings I did from the property which give some idea of the variety of settings there and the amazing light, as well as some of the beautiful round-leafed red box trees.
Dilma Roussef, President of Brazil – #dilmaRoussefAbstained">abstained on UN vote against legitimacy of Crimea's secession from Ukraine, then asks Vladimir Putin for help against CIA-orchestrated coup.
A serious political crisis has paralyzed Brazil. Argentina has changed its president. Venezuela is standing on the brink of violent clashes and a military coup. In Peru, Alberto Fujimori's heiress is coming to power. Why do progressive left-wing parties lose ground in Latin America rapidly?
Of course, Nicolas Maduro's remarks about the external factor - the support of the opposition for the United States - are partially true. No external factor can shake up an economically stable and prosperous country. You may say, dear reader, that there is no such country in the world at the moment, as we all still feel the effects of the global financial crisis. This is true, too. However, there are countries in Latin America that have been developing steadily, even if they change governments. It goes about such countries as Chile, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Uruguay. What is the matter then? The matter is about the very basis of everything - economy.
Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, President of Argentina (2007-2015)
In Brazil, Dilma Rousseff (Workers' Party, PT) has not done anything that her predecessors have not done. She has manipulated the budget, borrowed money from private banks to pay social benefits, etc. Yet, the economy of Brazil has been experiencing an unprecedented economic downturn. The opposition of Brazil used the discontent of the middle classes, whose real salaries have been declining from year to year. Therefore, a major corruption scandal that has been raging since 2014 has led to the impeachment procedure and temporary removal of President Rousseff from power. As we all know, the more things change, the more they stay the same. It is hard to believe that Dilma Rousseff will return to her office.
In Argentina, it was a strong economic crisis that contributed to the defeat of Kirchnerism (Peronism). In November 2015, pro-American liberal politician Mauricio Macri took office as Argentina's new president. Macri has conducted radical economic reforms, agreed with vulture funds and started borrowing on the international market. At the same time, though, he canceled social benefits, export duties and cut the education system.
#leftWingForces" id="leftWingForces">Left-wing forces lost their wings for being thoughtless
In Venezuela, President Nicolas Maduro is still clinging to power. He became the leader of Venezuela in 2013, after the death of his predecessor Hugo Chavez. His party lost last year's parliamentary elections, and it is his opponents, the liberals, who hold power in their hands now. Nicolas Maduro also remains under the pressure of the economic factor - low oil prices.
The state of affairs was absolutely different ten years ago.
A few weeks ago, the first round of the presidential election in Peru ended with the victory of the right-wing candidate Keiko Fujimori, a daughter of dictator Alberto Fujimori. The neoliberal politician may thus replace left-wing forces in Peru as well.
The state of affairs was absolutely different ten years ago. Leftist forces were on the rise after Hugo Chavez won the 1998 presidential vote in Venezuela, Lula da Silva - in Brazil in 2002, Nestor Kirchner - in Argentina in 2003, Tabaré Vázquez - in Uruguay in 2004 and Evo Morales - in Bolivia in 2005. During the period from 2006 to 2011, the left won the elections in Nicaragua, Ecuador, Paraguay and Peru. Those victories became possible because of catastrophic consequences of the neoliberal economy in the late 1990s: the deregulation of the economy and the opening of the privatized market to foreign companies. The events resulted in considerable wealth disparity that the local elites paid no attention to at first.
... after the crisis of 2008-2009 ... China ... stopped buying raw materials from Latin America.
The left took advantage of social movements of landless peasants in Brazil, Indians in Bolivia, the urban poor in Argentina, etc. PT or the Bolivian Movement to Socialism (MAS) arose directly from those protests. In 2003, those progressive governments saw high demands for natural resources. Bolivia increased its budget six times from 2005 to 2013. Investments from the dynamically developing Chinese economy flowed to Latin America. Those revenues allowed to establish a system of social support for the poorest layers of the population.
... the left-wing governments have not created a base to switch to nationally-oriented economy. They have turned into the countries of one export culture.
The results were overwhelming: the eradication of poverty, the rise of education and the formation of the middle class everywhere. However, after the crisis of 2008-2009, global economy has not recovered. In developed countries, including the USA, real wages have not increased over the past eight years. China, the main driving force, stopped buying raw materials from Latin America. GDP in Latin America dropped by 0.1 percent in 2015 for the first time since 2009. Noteworthy, China is the second largest trading partner in the region after the United States, but the main partner for Brazil, Chile and Peru and the second one for Mexico, Venezuela and Argentina. To crown it all, prices on raw materials, especially oil, have declined everywhere.
... 2/3 of 33 million hectares of arable land in [Argentina] that have been cultivated over the past 15 years, were attributed for sowing Monsanto's genetically modified soybeans. This soy goes to China as fodder for beef cattle.
It was then revealed that during the well-to-do years, the left-wing governments have not created a base to switch to nationally-oriented economy. They have turned into the countries of one export culture. For example, 2/3 of 33 million hectares of arable land in the Argentine pampas that have been cultivated over the past 15 years, were attributed for sowing Monsanto's genetically modified soybeans.#fnSubj1" id="txtSubj1"> 1 This soy goes to China as fodder for beef cattle. In Brazil, GM crops produced modified mosquitoes that carry Zika virus. Venezuela became a hostage to oil supplies. The changes were accompanied with the aging of the population, rapid urbanization and the growth of street crime. Corruption has skyrocketed everywhere as a consequence of both local mentality and oligarchic structure of the state.
#transnationalCorporations" id="transnationalCorporations">Transnational corporations modify Latin America
Transnational companies will improve their businesses with the help of new privatizations of de-privatized assets.
Against this background, the personal enrichment of politicians (the Kirchners have increased their assets seven times) started annoying people. The result of the story is sad. State coffers are empty, the society is divided: the middle classes are dissatisfied and the poor threaten to take to the streets for protests should austerity measures are enacted.
Mauricio Macri's first six months in the office show that there is no light at the end of the tunnel. Steel production and construction sector collapsed by 16-20 percent, the public debt associated with the release of short government bonds grows, inflation is rising. Retail prices and the growth of utility bills have tripped the inflation rate from January to April of the current year.
In addition, the questionable legitimacy of the change of power in Brazil has politically split the continent. Argentina has recognized the new government of Michel Temer, but Uruguay, Venezuela and El Salvador have not. Who benefits from the turn to liberalism? Transnational companies will improve their businesses with the help of new privatizations of de-privatized assets. The neoliberal offensive may bring fascist regimes to power, such as in Ukraine. In Latin America, this is a tradition. Wolfgang Schäuble, German Finance Minister and Chief Treasurer of the EU, said once: "Elections change nothing. There are rules." This phrase was the motto for the operation conducted by the European Commission to sober up the Greek SYRIZA government in the first half of 2015.
Many in Brazil pin hopes to the reaction from BRICS for the non-recognition of the new government of Michel Temer, especially on the part of Russia and China. However, where was Dilma Rousseff during the UN vote on the legitimacy of the Russian reunification with Crimea? #dilmaRoussefAbstained" id="dilmaRoussefAbstained">She abstained.
This video is of an interview by RT with Marine Le Pen, leader of the French Front National, on the problems of the European Union for itself and for Europe. As usual she goes directly to the point, displaying her characteristic piercing wit. We have included much of RT's article below the video, in the absence of a transcript. The original article and video were published here: https://www.rt.com/news/343715-eu-collapsing-france-lepen/
RT ARTICLE: The EU is on the brink of collapse, as two of its main “pillars” are “crumbling” despite the billions of euros spent on keeping the structure from falling, far-right French leader Marine Le Pen told RT, adding that the union would fail if France left it.
“I believe that the European Union is in the process of collapsing on itself for one simple reason. The two pillars on which it’s founded – Schengen and the euro – are in the process of crumbling,” Le Pen told Marie De Douhet of RT France in an exclusive interview. “So they’re in a sort of mad downward spiral in which they’re capable of anything today to try and keep this building standing.”
The leader of France’s hard-right Front National party believes the collapse is not a matter of “if” but “when,” saying the EU “shines from the light of a dead star” while its leaders are struggling to play for time “at the cost of billions trying to hold this structure up.”
As a “revealing” piece of evidence supporting her opinion, Le Pen cited one of Brussels’ recent punitive measures.
“The threat of condemnation of countries which do not accept migrants – a €250,000 fine for each migrant not taken in – is in itself revealing,” Le Pen said.
The European Commission unveiled plans earlier in May to impose a penalty of around €250,000 per rejected refugee on countries that refuse to share the burden of Europe’s migrant crisis.
For countries such as Poland, which is adamantly opposed to taking in refugees, the new compulsory measure would result in a fine of over €1 billion ($1.1 billion), given its existing quota of 6,500 people.
“The threats, the blackmail, now used systematically by the European Union is, above all, a gigantic problem of weakness,” Le Pen said.
Commenting on the migrant crisis, Le Pen said the EU is using immigrants as a tool to drive down labor costs across the 28-country bloc.
“That’s why the European Union supports tens of millions of immigrants in the coming years which will come onto the European Union labor market to push down wages,” she said. “So, in fact they have betrayed, if you like, the working class.”
Marine Le Pen has been a vocal supporter of the UK leaving the European Union, a move that the National Front hopes would inspire a similar “Frexit” campaign.
According to a March poll, 53 percent of French citizens surveyed would like to hold a Brexit-like referendum on France’s membership in the EU.
When asked if she feared any consequences for a “Frexit,” or Brussels’ retribution if it should go through, Le Pen said, “If France leaves the European Union, the European Union no longer exists.”
The leader of France’s hard-right Front National party believes the collapse is not a matter of “if” but “when,” saying the EU “shines from the light of a dead star” while its leaders are struggling to play for time “at the cost of billions trying to hold this structure up.”
As a “revealing” piece of evidence supporting her opinion, Le Pen cited one of Brussels’ recent punitive measures.
“The threat of condemnation of countries which do not accept migrants – a €250,000 fine for each migrant not taken in – is in itself revealing,” Le Pen said.
The European Commission unveiled plans earlier in May to impose a penalty of around €250,000 per rejected refugee on countries that refuse to share the burden of Europe’s migrant crisis.
For countries such as Poland, which is adamantly opposed to taking in refugees, the new compulsory measure would result in a fine of over €1 billion ($1.1 billion), given its existing quota of 6,500 people.
“The threats, the blackmail, now used systematically by the European Union is, above all, a gigantic problem of weakness,” Le Pen said.
Commenting on the migrant crisis, Le Pen said the EU is using immigrants as a tool to drive down labor costs across the 28-country bloc.
“That’s why the European Union supports tens of millions of immigrants in the coming years which will come onto the European Union labor market to push down wages,” she said. “So, in fact they have betrayed, if you like, the working class.”
Marine Le Pen has been a vocal supporter of the UK leaving the European Union, a move that the National Front hopes would inspire a similar “Frexit” campaign.
According to a March poll, 53 percent of French citizens surveyed would like to hold a Brexit-like referendum on France’s membership in the EU.
When asked if she feared any consequences for a “Frexit,” or Brussels’ retribution if it should go through, Le Pen said, “If France leaves the European Union, the European Union no longer exists.”
After the recent elections where I have been actively involved with campaigning and handing out how to vote cards, I have tried to gather some understanding of the Australian political psyche from talking to people and then from puzzling over the results of the various elections. Of course there probably is no such thing as an “Australian political psyche” since we are NOT in fact one but many (too many, actually with the population at over 24 million and the effects being felt very keenly especially in Melbourne, Sydney and Perth). It’s hard enough to understand just one person’s political psyche without trying to understand the nation's whole populace!
All the people I spoke to at the polling place yesterday largely remain an enigma to me. By the end of the day, it became apparent how fragmented most of the political views were. Or was it that I was not getting a real overview but just seeing a splinter of something that was important to each that prompted them to engage by doing as I was - distributing How To Vote material, or by being there to vote and entering into conversation?
Rising sea temperatures in the Mediterranean are encouraging alien lionfish species to invade and colonise new territories with potentially serious ecological and socioeconomic impacts.
People who have complained to me of poor coverage by the Australian media of the underlying reasons for Britain's exit from the EU will enjoy these shows. They report on various aspects, including the possibility of preventing the privatisation of British hospitals and mining, the ability to try to end Britain's live transport of domestic animals for thousands of kms, the ability to stop fracking, the desirability of a decrease in house prices, the reasons why people outside the big cities voted against the EU, and mass immigration in an economy where unemployment is already high and numbers are an issue. 
This article is about the real reason why the medicare rebates don't cover the cost of doctors' services and therefore why the practice of general medicine is increasingly unsatisfactory for doctors and patients.
Do you remember coming to previous elections and going to vote above the line, then suddenly realising that you hadn't thought to find out about every senate candidate? So, there you were, obliged to fill out every box, trying to guess from the names the least evil of the fifty or seventy candidates you had never heard of. This election there has been a profound and potentially very empowering change. We will have the opportunity to vote for six only or more senate candidates. So we will be able to vote for the people and parties we really want this time and not vote at all for the ones we don't want or do not know. The article below is republished from the Australian Electoral Commission website. It gives the names of the candidates and links to their websites where known. At the bottom there is a collection of little-known independent candidates. In most cases you can use search engines to find these candidates. We will put up the candidates for other states if and when we have time, but you can get their names and affiliations and download an excel file with their websites and contact details here: 
For the past ten years Australians have been subjected to an exceptionally high level of population growth and now they are losing patience. (Article first published on June 13, 2016 at the 
The OpenAustralia Foundation, the charity that runs a 
Right now the UK is politically divided on whether or not to leave the European Union and the mood in many quarters is ugly. It seems that there is a very strong chance that the forthcoming Brexit referendum could swing in favour of the Leave vote, something that seemed unimaginable a few years ago. The main reason for most people wanting to leave is because they are concerned with the UK’s rapid rate of population growth. This article is by Michael Bayliss (President of Sustainable Population Australia Victoria and Tasmania Branch) and Mark Allen (Population, Permaculture and Planning)
This bad news is from Whitehorse where some areas are famous for their bush areas and trees and now the government plans destroying a lot of it and people are angry - do add your voice in support. We are supposed to grow more trees not destroy them like vandals.
Dear Friends of the Trees in Whitehorse
Here cdb poet, Brolga-Brolga, tells a moral tale of how a number of neighbours clubbed together to speculate on their adjacent land, but when they tried to buy again, they were already priced out of the market. With homage to Barry Humpreys who wrote The Highett Waltz, sung by Dame Edna, and linked to here. 
You may have noticed that three articles suddenly disappeared from the site a day ago, then the site disappeared. It has been restored but we have to manually input those articles again. Although most of the problems are solved and we have not lost our site, there may still be some problems in next few days. We apologise for these.
Roger Stone
On Friday June 3rd 2016, the Simplicity Institute screened its newly produced film 
David Suzuki says Australia and Canada are ‘full’ and calls country’s immigration policy ‘crazy’. "We plunder southern countries by depriving them of future leaders, and we want to increase our population to support economic growth. It’s crazy!” This translated excerpt situates Suzuki's remarks on numbers in context and is a response to an email recently doing the rounds. Candobetter.net Canadian writer, Tim Murray, has 
The following article publishes an email sent by Tony Recsei, President of Save our Suburbs NSW, to SOS members and friends. Dated Thursday, 26 May 2016, it is a report on his attendance at a luncheon organised by the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) in Paramatta. 
Some time back, a friend of mine won a weekend at 
On the aerial view I have roughed in the disused fences in dotted lines, two dams as blue spots, and pale white contour lines to show the main hills. The thickest trees are the forest which covers the largest hill, providing shelter for birds and kangaroos and a variety of walks amongst quite dramatic scenery. There are three enclosed building areas, with the guesthouse or 'shed' at the base.
This video is of an interview by RT with Marine Le Pen, leader of the French Front National, on the problems of the European Union for itself and for Europe. As usual she goes directly to the point, displaying her characteristic piercing wit. We have included much of RT's article below the video, in the absence of a transcript. The original article and video were published here: 
Recent comments